Illllllllllllllllimmmmiimmim 


B  E  R  K  E  L  E  lT\ 

LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF 


Peter's  IRame 

or 
a  SHvine  Crebential  in  a  IRame 


or 


A  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name 


BY  T.  SMYTH-VAUDRY,  C.PR., 
of  the  Archdiocese  of  Chicago 


LOAN  STACK 


NIHIL  OBSTAT. 

JOANNES  PINNEL, 

Censor  deputatus. 


IMPRIMATUR. 

f  JOANNES  ANTONIUS, 

Ep.  Sti.  Antonii. 

In  festo  Cathedrae  S.  Petri  Romae,  A.  D.  1909. 


COPYRIGHT,  1909,  BY  T.  SMYTH-VAUDRY. 


GENERAL  DIVISIONS 

First  Part,- 

Peter's  name    proclaims  him    possessor   of  all 
Church-power,  under  Christ. 

Second  Part,— 

Peter's  name  proclaims  him  the  source  of  all 
Church-power,  under  Christ. 


699 


FIRST  PART 

Peter's  name  proclaims  him  possessor  of  all  Church-power 
under  Christ 13 

NOTE     I 
Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  Christ's  other  self 13 

NOTE   II 

Peter's  name  is  the  scriptural  equivalent  of  the  Catholic 

term   "Pope"    24 

NOTE    III 

Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  sovereign  Ruler, 
infallible  Teacher,  and  High  Priest  of  the  Church. ...  28 

NOTE    IV 

Scriptural  meaning  of  Peter's  name  according  to  the 
Fathers 34 

NOTE  V 

Peter's  name  means,  scripturally  and  patristically,  the 
Church's  Foundation,  Bulwark,  Capstone,  and  fining 
Mark  41 

SECOND  PART 

Peter's  name  proclaims  him  the  source  of  all  Church- 
power,  under  Christ  51 

NOTE    VI 
A  glance  at  the  names  of  Jesus  and   Peter    51 


Table  of  Contents  9 

NOTE   VII 

Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  that  Peter  is,  under 
and  with  Christ,  the  alpha  or  co-beginning  of  the 
Church  56 

NOTE  VIII 

Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  visible  Rock  or 
perennial  source  of  the  entity  of  the  Church 66 

NOTE    IX 

Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  visible  Rock  or 
perennial  source  of  Church  authority  68 

NOTE   X 

Peter's    name    means,    scripturally,    the    visible    Rock    or 

perennial    source   of    the    infallibility    of    the    Church     71 

NOTE   XI 

Peter's    name    means,    scripturally,    the    visible    Rock    or 

perennial  source  of  the  indefectibility  of  the  Church     75 

NOTE  XII 

Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  visible  Rock  or 
perennial  source  of  the  Church's  compactness  and 
solidity  76 

NOTE    XIII 

Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  visible  Rock  or 
perennial  source  of  the  one-ness  and  unicity  of  the 
Church  77 

NOTE  XIV 

Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  visible  Rock  or 
ministerial  source  of  the  holiness  of  the  Church  81 

NOTE   XV 

Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  visible  Rock  or 
perennial  source  of  the  Catholicity  or  universality  of 
the  Church  .  83 


io  Table  of  Contents 

NOTE   XVI 

Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  visible  Rock  or 
perennial  source  of  the  Apostolicity  of  the  Church  86 

NOTE  XVII 

Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  Apostle  more  deeply 
beloved  of  the  L,ord  than  any  other  Apostle  99 

NOTE  XVIII 

Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  Rock  or  perennial 
source  of  anti-pharisaism,  i.  e.  of  the  restoration  of 
the  fallen  —  the  uplifter  of  the  down-trodden  and 
of  the  fallen  103 

NOTE  XIX 

Comparative  view  of  the  threefold  power  vested  in  the 
Church  125 

NOTE    XX 

Did  all  the  Apostles  receive  their  jurisdiction  from  Christ 
exclusively  ?  134 

NOTE   XXI 

Comparative  powers  of  Peter  and  of  the  other  Apostles  138 

NOTE  XXII 

How  can  it  be  known  that  the  extraordinary  jurisdiction 
and  the  personal  infallibility  of  each  of  the  Apostles 
do  not  endure  in  their  successors  ?  147 

NOTE   XXIII 

Comparative  Church-powers  of  Christ  and  of  Peter....   150 

NOTE     XXIV 

The  alternative:    either  Peter  or  Atheism    .  .    154 


, 


Peter's  Name  Proclaims  Him 

POSSESSOR 
of  all  Church-power,  Under  Christ 


Peter's  name  proclaims  him  possessor  of 
all  Church-power,  under  Christ. 

(By  Church-power  we  understand  the  threefold 
power  vested  in  the  Church  by  our  divine  Lord,  viz., 
the  ruling,  teaching,  and  sanctifying  power:  the  royal, 
prophetic,  and  sacerdotal  office.) 


NOTE  I 


Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  Christ's  other  self 
A  startling  similarity 

In  our  notes  on  the  Names  of  Jesus  and  Peter 
in  Holy  Writ,  we  have  seen  that  these  two  names,  by 
reason  of  the  startling  similarity  of  treatment  which 
they  receive  in  the  Scriptures,  forcibly  suggest  a  cor- 
responding similarity  or  identity  of  office  in  their 
respective  bearers.  In  fact,  the  Word  of  God  af- 
firms such  identity  of  office  (viz.,  the  papal  office)  in 
Jesus  and  Peter,  by  applying  the  papal  title  of  the  Rock 
to  the  Master  as  well  as  to  His  Chief  Apostle :  Matt.  7. 
24;  16.  18;  John  i.  42;  i  Cor.  10.  4. 

Let  us  glance,  once  more,  at  the  marvelous  simi- 
larity of  treatment  and  the  sovereign  pre-eminence 
bestowed  by  Holy  Writ  on  the  names  of  Jesus  and 
Peter. 


14  Peter's  Name; 

(a)  The    New   Testament    invariably   ranges    the 
Apostles  under  Jesus   in  its  every  mention  of  them 
in   connection  with  the   Master. 

The  New  Testament  likewise  systematically  ranges 
all  the  Apostles  under  Peter  in  its  four  catalogs  of 
the  Apostles,  and  in  its  every  mention  by  name  of  a 
fraction  or  group  of  the  Apostolic  College  in  con- 
nection with  him. 

(b)  The  New  Testament  groups  the  Apostles  even 
anonymously  under   the  head-name  of  Jesus. 

In  precisely  the  same  manner,  does  it  group 
the  Apostles  even  anonymously  under  the  head- 
name  of  Peter  as  the  future  or  actual  successor  of 
Christ  in  the  visible  headship  of  the  Church — thus 
putting  Peter  on  a  relative  level  of  authority  with 
Christ  Himself  not  only  by  ranging  all  under  him 
but  by  suppressing  all  names  except  Christ's  and 
Peter's. 

(c)  The   New    Testament   makes   more    frequent 
mention  of  Jesus  by  name  than  of  all  the  Apostles 
and  disciples. 

The  new  Testament  likewise  makes  more  frequent 
mention  of,  and  consequently  devotes  more  attention 
to,  Peter, — by  name,  singly  and  individually — than  to 
any  other  Apostle,  not  excepting  St.  Paul  and  the  two 
other  leading  Apostles,  St.  John  and  St.  James. 

In  short,  the  names  of  Jesus  and  Peter  hold  the 
first,  the  most  conspicuous  and  the  most  commanding 
position  in  Holy  Writ. 

A  Triple  Scale  of  ever-ascending  grandeur 

It  is  now  our  purpose,  in  this  series  of  Notes,  to 
take  a  closer  view  of  the  scriptural  meaning  and  im- 
port of  the  name  of  Peter,  j 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  15 

It  is  a  name  which  is  very  far  from  receiving  its 
due  meed  of  praise  and  admiration.  Who  ever  adverts 
to  its  triple  force  and  import?  For,  Peter's  name  is 
a  triple  scale  of  ever  ascending  grandeur — a  triple 
firmament  superposed  one  over  the  other  and  rising 
up  to  heights  which  angel  wings  can  never  mount. 

First,  it  alone  is  scripturally,  and  all  in  one,  a  title 
of  office,  a  personal  proper  name,  and  a  God-given 
name. 

Second,  it  alone  is  scripturally  and  all  in  one,  a 
title  of  office,  a  personal  proper  name,  a  God-given 
name,  and  a  Divine  name  besides — i.  e.,  one  of  God's 
own  scriptural  names  and  titles. 

Third,  it  is  a  name  which  God  shares  with  none, 
except  Christ  and  Simon  Barjona — to  the  exclusion 
of  all  the  rest  of  creation. 


(First)  Peter's  name  alone  is  scripturally,  and  all 
in  one,  a  title  of  office,  a  personal  proper  name,  and  a 
God-given  name. 

It  is  a  God-given  name;  not  conferred  by  an 
Angel,  like  Israel's  (Gen.  32.  28),  or  by  a  prophet, 
but  by  the  Lord  Incarnate  in  person:  (John  i.  42; 
Mark  3.  16.) 

The  surname  of  Boanerges  was  indeed  conferred 
on  James  and  John  by  our  Lord  himself  (Mark  3.  17). 
— not  however  as  an  essential,  but  as  a  purely  incident- 
al, addition  to  their  names.  It  was  not  a  substitute  for 
the  same.  Much  less  was  it  a  title  of  office.  Hence, 
they  are,  ever  after,  designated  in  Holy  Writ  as  James 
and  John,  never  under  the  appellation  of  Boanerges. 


1 6  Peter's  Name; 

But  Peter's  name  was  given  him  both  as  an  es- 
sential and  perpetual  addition  to,  and  substitute  for, 
that  of  Simon  Barjona,  and  as  an  essential  perpetual 
title  of  office.  Therefore  does  Holy  Writ  almost 
constantly  call  him  by  that  Divine  name —  over  one 
hundred  and  sixty  times. 

Note  again  that  Abraham's  name,  though  God-given 
(Gen.  17.  5)  is  not,  like  Peter's,  a  Divine  title  of 
office. 

Peter,  then,  it  may  be  objected,  was  more  favored 
of  heaven,  in  one  respect  at  least,  than  Jesus  Himself 
— since  Jesus  received  his  name  through  the  ministry 
of  an  angel  (Matt.  i.  21 ;  Luke  i.  31).  The  answer 
suggests  itself  at  once,  that,  if  Jesus  did,  outwardly, 
receive  his  name  through  an  angel,  He  received  it  in- 
wardly, in  the  sanctuary  of  his  soul, — not  only  directly 
but  with  infinite  directness,  from  the  Father — in  the 
threefold  embrace  of  his  eternal  generation,  of  his 
temporal  filiation,  and  of  the  face-to-face  vision. 


(Second)  Peter's  name  alone  is  scripturally,  and 
all  in  one,  a  title  of  office,  a  personal  proper  name,  a 
God-given  name  and  a  Divine  name  besides, — it  be- 
ing one  of  God's  own  scriptural  names  and  titles. 

No  such  distinction  attaches  to  the  names  of  Abra- 
ham and  Boanerges.  They  are  God-given,  but  they 
are  not  God's  own  personal  names  and  titles. 

True,  God  has  been  pleased  to  share  some  of  his 
own  scriptural  names  with  men  and  with  the  heavenly 
spirits  above.  With  myriads  of  the  latter,  for  instance, 
does  he  share  the  beautiful  title  of  Angel;  for,  He 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  17 

calls  himself  the  Angel,  the  Angel  of  the  Covenant: 
Mai.  3.  i ;  Matt.  n.  10;  Mark  i.  2;  Luke  I.  76;  and 
7.27. 

The  Creator  shares  his  very  name  of  God  with 
us,  as  an  earnest  of  eternal  glory  as  well  as  of  the 
super-human,  super-angelic,  divine  nature  and  dignity 
which  we  receive  in  baptism.  Thus,  for  instance, 
speaketh  the  Lord  to  his  deified  children,  in  the  book 
of  Psalms :  "I  have  said,  Ye  are  gods  and  all  of  you 
the  sons  of  the  Most  High:"  Psalm  81.  6;  John  10.  34. 

He  also  shares  with  us  His  title  of  Father,  as  a 
title  of  love.  "For  this  cause,"  says  St.  Paul,  "I  bow 
my  knees  to  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
of  whom  all  paternity  in  heaven  and  earth  is  named." 
Eph.  3.  15. 

We  should,  however,  carefully  note  that  God  does 
not  bestow  these  names  of  His — Angel,  God,  Father 
— upon  any  creature  as  proper  individual  names,  but 
only  as  common  names  or  titles  either  of  office,  or 
of  honor. 

On  the  other  hand,  Peter's  name,  which  is  one 
of  God's  own  names  and  titles,  has  been  conferred 
upon  Simon  Barjona  not  only  as  Simon's  Divine  title 
of  office  but  as  Simon's  own  perpetual  proper  name. 
Now,  to  no  other  mere  creature  has  God  said,  as  He 
did  virtually  to  Peter:  "Behold,  one  of  my  own 
personal  names  shall  be  thine  own  individual  proper 
name." 

For,  remember  that  the  Holy  Spirit  gives  the  name 
of  Rock  or  Peter — to  Jehovah,  to  the  Redeemer  and 

PETER'S  NAME  2 


1 8  Peter's  Name; 

Saviour,  to  the  Christ,  to  God  Incarnate  and  manifest 
in  the  flesh,  and  finally  to  Simon  Barjona.' 


a.  THE  HoivY  SPIRIT  CALIFS  JEHOVAH  "ROCK/'  i.  e., 
Peter. 

And  note,  in  this  connection,  that,  according  to  the 
divine  tradition  of  the  old  Synagogue,  the  name  "Je- 
hovah," considered  as  a  unit,  signifies  the  absolute 
oneness  of  God — whilst,  viewed  in  its  four  component 
Hebrew  letters,  it  signifies  God  the  Father,  the  Son, 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  God  Incarnate.  Therefore,  in 
applying  the  name  of  Rock  to  Jehovah,  the  Holy  Spirit 
applies  it  to  the  blessed  Trinity  and  to  the  sacred 
Humanity  of  the  Redeemer.  (See  our  Notes  on  the 
Church  and  the  Synagogue.) 

The  Holy  Spirit  calls  Jehovah  "Rock,"  or  Peter, 
for  instance,  in  Deut..32.  4:  "Ascribe  ye  greatness  un- 
to our  God,  the  Rock." 

i  Sam.  2.  2 :  Neither  is  there  any  rock  like  our 
God. 

i  Sam.  23.  3 :  The  God  of  Israel  said,  the  Rock 
of  Israel  spake — . 

Ps.  17.  2,  31:  Jehovah  is  my  Rock  and  my  fort- 
ress ....  Who  is  a  rock,  save  our  God  ? 

Ps.  29.  i :  Unto  thee  will  I  cry,  O  Jehovah,  my 
Rock, 

Ps.  72.  26:    God  is  the  Rock  of  my  heart. 

Is.  26.  4:  Trust  ye  in  the  Lord  forever:  for  in 
the  Lord  Jehovah  is  the  Rock  of  ages. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  In  a  Name  19 

b.  THE:  HOLY  SPIRIT  GIVES  THE  NAME  OF  ROCK 
OR  PETER  TO  THE  REDEEMER  AND  SAVIOUR:  for  in- 
stance, in  Gen.  49.  24 :  And  the  arms  of  his  hands  were 
made  strong  by  the  hands  of  the  Mighty  One  of  Jacob 
— from  thence  is  the  Shepherd,  the  (Stone  or)  Rock 
of  Israel. 

Deut.  32.  15:  Then  he  forsook  God  who  made 
him,  and  lightly  esteemed  the  Rock  of  his  salvation. 

2  Sam.  22.  47.  Jehovah  liveth,  and  blessed  be  my 
Rock;  and  exalted  be  the  God  of  the  Rock  of  my 
salvation. 

Ps.  18.  15.  O  Jehovah,  my  Rock  and  my  Re- 
deemer ! 

P.  88.  27:    Rock  of  my  salvation. 

Ps.  94.  i :  Make  a  joyful  noise  to  the  Rock  of 
our  salvation. 

Note,  in  connection  with  Gen.  49.  24,  "from  thence 
is  the  Shepherd,  the  Rock  of  Israel,"  that  Messiah 
calls  himself  the  Good  Shepherd  (John  10.  14)  and 
the  Rock:  Matt.  7.  24;  and  21.  42. 


c.  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT  GIVES  THE  NAME  OF  ROCK,  OR 
PETER,  TO  THE  CHRIST — for  instance,  in  i  Cor.  10.4: 
For  they  drank  of  that  spiritual  Rock  that  followed 
them,  and  that  Rock  was  Christ. 


d.  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT  GIVES  THE  NAME  OF  ROCK, 
OR  PETER,  To  GOD  INCARNATE  and  manifest  in  the  flesh 
— for  instance,  in  Matt.  7.  24,  our  Lord  praises  the 


2O  Peter's  Name; 

wisdom  of  the  man  who  builds  his  house  on  the  Rock, 
i.  e.,  on  the  Christ  himself. 

God  Incarnate  and  manifest  in  the  flesh  calls  Him- 
self the  Rock  or  the  Stone,  in  Matt.  7.  24;  21.  42;  21. 
44;  Luke  20.  17,  18.  See  also  Acts.  4.  n  ;  Eph.  2.  20; 
i.  Pet.  2.4,6,7,8.  — 


Many  centuries  before  His  advent,  THE  SYNAGOGUE 
HERSELF  HAILED  MESSIAH  AS  THE  ROCK  and  as  Jeho- 
vah, thereby  proclaiming  him  God  by  nature  and  by 
essence ;  for,  such  is  the  rabbinical  as  well  as  the  bibli- 
cal import  of  the  term  "Jehovah."  We  could  multiply 
citations  from  authorised  Jewish  sources,  but  our  lim- 
ited space  restricts  us  to  a  few. 

Medrasch-Rabba  on  Lamentations,  fol.  68,  col.  2, 
ed.  Amsterdam — says  :  "What  is  the  name  of  Messiah  ? 
Rabbi  Abba,  son  of  Cahana,  answers :  Jehovah  is  his 
Name." 

Through  Rabbi  Solomon  Yarhhi,  the  Synagogue 
teaches  that  "the  Rock  is  King  Messiah."  (On.  Is.  28. 

!6.) 

The  same  Rabbi  sums  up  the  witness  of  the  ancient 
Fathers  of  the  Synagogue  in  the  following  sentence, 
which  he  puts  in  the  mouth  of  Jehovah :  "I  am  he 
who  has  laid  that  foundation  (Is.  28.  16).  From  of 
old  have  I  resolved  this  thing,  and  I  have  raised  King 
Messiah  to  be  in  Sion  a  tried  stone,"  or  rock.  (Drach: 
Harmonic  entre  1'Eglise  et  la  Synagogue,  vol.  2,  p. 
421.) 

How  beautiful  the  prayer  of  the  Synagogue  through 
the  royal  prophet  David:  "O  Jehovah,  my  Rock  and 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  21 

my  Redeemer"  (Ps.  18.  15). — It  is  a  cry  of  infinite 
yearning  that  rends  the  heavens  and  haunts  the  ages. 
How  pathetic  the  testimony  of  the  Synagogue 
through  one  of  her  sons,  the  well-known  Jewish  writer 
Philo.  Listen  to  words  of  profound  sublimity,  echo- 
ing the  purest  traditions  of  the  old  Jewish  Church  of 
God.  Philo  (B.  c.  30)  writes: — "The  law -giver  says: 
'Jehovah  hath  made  His  people  suck  honey  out  of  the 
rock  and  oil  out  of  the  hardest  rock.'  (Deut.  32.  13) — 
the  solid  Rock,  the  indissoluble  Rock  that  none  can 
break.  Moses  designates,  by  that  Rock,  the  Wisdom 
of  God,  who  tenderly  feedeth,  nurseth  and  reareth 
those  who  aspire  to  the  incorruptible  life.  This  Rock, 
become  as  it  were  the  mother  of  all  men  in  the  world, 
presents  to  her  children  a  food  which  she  drazvs  from 
her  own  substance.  .  .  But  all  are  not  found  worthy  of 
that  Divine  food .  .  .  The  inspired  writer,  employing 
somewhere  else  an  equivalent  expression,  calls  that 
Rock  MANNA,  The  Divine  Word  more  Spent  than 
all  beings."  "The  Rock  is  King  Messiah,"  says  the 
Synagogue.  (See  our  Notes  on  the  Church  and  the 
Synagogue,  pp.  78,  106,  etc. — and  Drach's  Harmonic 
entre  1'Eglise  et  la  Synagogue,  2d.  vol.  pp.  395,  477 — 
478,  etc.) 


(Third)  Rock,  or  Peter,  is  a  name  of  God  which 
He  shares  with  none  except  Christ  and  Simon  Barjona, 
to  the  exclusion  of  all  the  rest  of  creation. 

So  jealous  is  Jehovah  of  the  name  and  title  of  Rock 
that  He  will  not  share  it  with  any  being  in  heaven  and 
on  earth,  except  Jesus  Christ  and  Peter. 


22  Peter's  Name; 

Holy  Writ  indeed  compares  Abraham  to  a  quarry 
or  rock,  but  confers  not  that  name  upon  him.  The 
term  is  simply  applied  to  him  by  way  of  comparison, 
not  as  a  proper  name.  His  first  name,  Abram,  was 
changed  into  Abraham,  not  into  Peter.  His  title  was 
Father  of  a  multitude,  not  the  Rock,  not  Cephas. 

Inasmuch  as  Christ's  person  pertains  to  the  God- 
head, Peter  is  the  one  and  sole  personality  in  all 
creation  zvith  whom  God  shares  His  name  and  title  of 
Rock.  As  a  human  person,  Peter  alone  among  all  the 
sons  of  Adam,  Peter  alone,  Peter  continued  in  his  suc- 
cession, enjoys  such  a  unique  prerogative. 

Behold  a  wonder  of  surpassing  magnitude  and 
significance:  Jehovah  proclaims  Jesus  Christ,  "Rock," 
or  "Peter,"  and  He  proclaims  Simon,  "Rock,"  or 
Peter." 

What  a  divine  proclamation  of  Simon  Barjona's 
office  as  Christ's  "other  self"  (St.  Augustin)  :  Jeho- 
vah-the-Rock,  Jesus-the-Rock,  Christ-the-Rock,  and 
Simon-the-Rock ! 

What  a  truly  divine  proclamation  of  a  truly  divine 
office !  Hear :  Jehovah-Peter,  Jesus-Peter,  Christ- 
Peter,  and  Simon-Peter! 

Christ  Jesus  is  the  vicarious  Rock  of  Jehovah,  and 
Peter  is  the  vicarious  Rock  of  God  Incarnate — Christ's 
"other  self,"  says  St.  Augustin:  Serm.  46. 

(See  our  Notes  on  the  Names  of  Jesus  and  Peter 
in  Holy  Writ,  page  10,  etc.) 

"Thou  art  Peter  (or  Rock)  and  upon  this  Rock 
I  will  build  My  Church"  Matt.  16.  18. 

Beza,  the  heresiarch,  who  calls  the  pope  "Anti- 
christ," is  compelled  to  say  of  our  text: 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  23 

"The  Lord  speaking  in  Syriac  said  Kepha 

in  both  places:" —  i.  e.,  our  Lord  said,  "Thou  art 
Kepha  and  upon  this  Kepha  I  will  build  my  Church: 
Thou  art  Rock  and  upon  this  Rock  I  will  build  my 
Church." 

Of  the  Greek  translation  of  this  same  passage  of 
S.  Matthew,  Beza  says:  "In  Greek  likewise,  petros  and 
petra  differ  only  in  their  termination,  not  in  their  mean- 
ing :" —  i.  e.,  in  Greek  as  well  as  in  Syriac  the  meaning 
is:  "Thou  art  Rock  and  upon  this  Rock  I  will  build 
my  Church."  (Cfr.  C.  a  Lap.  in  loco.) 

"The  writer  of  the  Greek  simply  gave  to  the  term, 
when  used  as  a  surname  of  Simon,  a  masculine  ending 
[Petr-o^]  for  the  sake  of  the  grace  of  language,  since 
both  terms  mean  a  rock."  (Breen.) 

The  ripest  Protestant  scholarship  holds  with  Dr. 
Briggs,  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  that  "all 
attempts  to  explain  the  Rock  in  any  other  way  but 
as  referring  to  Peter  have  ignominiously  failed." 
(North  Amer.  Rev.,  Feb.  15,  1907.) 

Another  Protestant  writer,  Dr.  Marsh,  rightly  re- 
marks :  "It  seems  a  desperate  undertaking  to  prove 
that  our  Saviour  alluded  to  any  other  person  than  to 
St.  Peter,  for  the  words  of  the  passage  can  indicate 
no  one  else."  (Comparative  View,  app.  n.  D.) — 

A  third  Protestant  divine,  Rev.  J.  S.  Thompson, 

is  not  less  emphatic :  "Protestants have  used  all 

the  hardihood  of  lawless  criticism  in  their  attempts  to 
reason  away  the  Catholic  interpretation."  (Monotes- 
saron,  p.  194,  Baltimore,  1829:  ap.  Brandi's  Why  am 
I  a  Catholic.) 


24  Peter's  Name; 

NOTE  II 


Peter's  name  is  the  scriptural  equivalent  of  the  Catholic  term 
"Pope" 

We  can  never  lay  too  much  stress  on  a  fact  of 
incalculable  importance,  which  is  quite  commonly  over- 
looked and  neglected:  the  fact  that,  both  in  its  scrip- 
tural and  in  its  traditional  meaning,  the  term  "Peter" 
is  the  exact  equivalent  of  the  Catholic  term  "Pope." 

Simon  Peter,  as  a  compound  name,  meant  from  the 
first  with  the  Apostles  and  their  followers — Simon  the 
Rock,  Simon  the  Head,  Simon  the  Confirmer  of  the 
Faith,  the  Supreme  Ruler,  the  Vicegerent  of  Jesus 
Christ — in  a  word,  Simon  the  Pope,  as  we  would  say 
now-a-days. 

We  have  frequently  adverted  to  this  beautiful 
and  prolific  truth;  but  it  is  inexhaustible  and  suscepti- 
ble of  additional  proof. 

As  "Jesus"  is  not  merely  a  personal  name  but  a 
title  of  office,  so  "Peter"  is  not  merely  the  name  of  a 
person  otherwise  called  Simon;  it  is  moreover  a  mo- 
mentous title  of  office.  As  the  name  of  Jesus  is  ex- 
pressive, declarative  and  commemorative  of  the  Mes- 
siahship  of  Christ,  and  means  literally  and  really  "the 
Saviour:"  so,  by  the  express  will  of  Christ,  the  name 
of  Peter  is  expressive,  declarative  and  commemorative 
of  the  headship  of  Simon,  and  means  Simon  the  Rock, 
the  Head,  the  Supreme  Ruler.  It  is  the  name  of  the 
very  office  of  Christ  given  to  Peter  to  indicate  that 
Peter  inherits  the  office  of  the  Master.  Christ  in- 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  25 

vests  Peter  with  his  own  glorious  title  of  "Rock,"  the 
better  to  show  that  Peter  is  Christ's  other  self,  to  use 
once  more  the  language  of  St.  Augustin. 

Jesus  says  to  Simon,  not  in  so  many  words,  but  by 
clear  implication:  ''What  more  can  I  do,  O  Simon, 
to  proclaim  my  solemn  appointment  of  thee  as  my  suc- 
cessor in  office?  Behold,  as  some  of  the  kings  of  the 
earth  who  have  the  good  of  their  kingdom  at  heart  most 
wisely  crown  their  successors  with  their  own  hand  be- 
fore departing  from  this  life — so  do  I  now  myself 
crown  thee  as  my  successor  before  I  lay  down  my  life 
for  my  beloved  kingdom.  Yea,  as  some  of  the  crowned 
heads  of  this  world  put  their  crown  upon  the  brow  of 
their  intended  successor — so  do  I  now  put  on  thy  brow, 
O  Simon,  more  than  a  diadem :  I  crown  thee  with  my 
own  royal  name  and  title  of  office,  the  most  momentous 
name  and  title  in  the  sphere  of  Church-government, 
after  that  of  Jesus.  Therefore,  even  as  I  am  the 
Rock  or  Cephas  the  First,  or  Peter  the  First — so  do  I 
appoint  thee  Cephas  or  Peter  the  Second ;  mark,  Peter 
the  Second,  not  Peter  the  last.  For,  as  thou  art  my 
official  self  visibly  continued,  so  wilt  thou  thyself  be 
officially  and  visibly  continued  in  thy  succession  which, 
being,  as  thou  art,  the  foundation  of  the  Church,  must 
needs  last  as  long  as  the  Church  in  order  to  protect  her 
from  the  gates  of  hell. 

I  am  the  one  Foundation,  and  thou,  O  Peter,  art  no 
other  foundation  indeed,  but  the  visible  force,  the 
visible  effluence,  the  visible  continance  of  the  one 
Foundation. 

I  am  the  Rock  by  nature  and  by  right,  whilst  thou, 
O  Peter,  art  the  Rock  by  participation  and  by  grace. 


26  Peter's  Name; 

Thou  shalt  bear  my  name,  as  being  personally  incor- 
porated into  my  own  royal  dynasty  and  the  visible 
continuance  thereof.  My  Apostles  and  disciples  must 
revere  thee  as  such,  thy  very  name  being  to  them  all 
a  perpetual  reminder  of  thy  divine  vicegerency." 

Now,  the  Apostles  and  the  disciples  knew  that 
Christ's  strictly  personal  office,  as  the  Redeemer  of  the 
world  and  the  Founder  of  Christianity  and  the  author 
of  its  doctrines,  sacraments  and  essential  polity — was 
absolutely  untransferable,  such  transference  being, 
moreover,  uncalled  for  and  unnecessary.  But  they 
also  knew,  from  the  very  name  of  Peter,  that  Christ's 
visible  office  as  the  Rock  goes  with  the  bearer  of  the 
name  of  the  Rock  and  must  needs  continue  here  below ; 
for,  without  such  a  Rock  (Christ  avers)  his  Church 
would  collapse  under  the  powers  or  gates  of  hell,  Matt. 
16.  18:  i.  e.,  falsehood  or  heresy,  and  internal  dis- 
ruption or  schism. 

Peter's  name,  then,  tells  the  Apostles  and  the 
Church,  with  Christ's  own  lips,  as  it  were,  that  Peter 
has  inherited  the  threefold  office  of  the  Rock :  that  he 
is  the  Rock  of  Authority,  the  Rock  of  infallible  Truth 
and  the  Rock  of  the  legitimate  Priesthood — the  Rock 
of  authority  that  binds  and  keeps  the  Church  in  the 
indivisible  unity  of  the  one  compact  mystic  Body  of 
Jesus  Christ.  Eph.  4.  16; 

Peter  is  the  Rock  of  authority:  for,  he  is  the 
Foundation,  and  as  the  whole  structure  follows  the 
foundation,  so  does  the  whole  Church  follow  Peter 
as  her  Christ-appointed  ruler. 

Peter  is  the  Rock  of  infallible  Truth  that  binds 
and  keeps  the  Church  in  the  indivisible  unity  of  the 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  27 

one  Faith  or  doctrine  of  Jesus  Christ,  Eph.  4.  5 ;  the 
Rock  or  sacrificial  Stone  of  the  one  legitimate  Priest- 
hood, that  binds  and  keeps  the  Church  in  the  indivisible 
unity  of  sacrificial  worship  and  sacramental  communion 
in  Jesus  Christ.  Eph.  4.  5. 

,  Yes,  Peter  is  the  Rock  of  the  priesthood:  for 
Christ  founded  on  Peter  his  zvhole  Church — apostolate 
and  priesthood  and  laity.  Therefore,  a  priesthood 
severed  from  the  foundation  (Peter),  is  out  of  the 
Christ-established  order — is  unlawful  and  illegitimate. 

Christ's  other  self,  supreme  ruler,  infallible  teacher, 
sovereign  pontiff  holding  the  visible  place  and  office 
of  Jesus  Christ  over  the  Church :  such  is  the  scriptural 
face-value  and  face-meaning  of  the  name  of  Peter. 

Even  the  Synagogue,  though  prophetically  and  his- 
torically a  mere  preparatory  school  for  the  universal 
or  Catholic  Church,  was  nevertheless  endowed  with  an 
infallible  oracle  in  her  sovereign  Pontificate.  Was 
the  type  better  equipped  than  the  reality?  Was  the 
shadow  more  solid  than  the  substance?  Was  a  purely 
local  and  national  organism  better  safeguarded  against 
error  and  division  than  the  world-embracing  organi- 
sation founded  by  God  Incarnate  in  Person? 


28  Peter's  Name; 

NOTE  III 


Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  sovereign  Ruler,  infallible 
Teacher,  and  High  Priest  of  the  Church. 

That  our  Lord  himself  wrote  on  the  very  face  of 
Peter's  name  the  Divine  proof  of  its  bearer's  supre- 
macy, is  evident  from  the  text  itself  and  from  the 
scriptural  explanation  vouchsafed  by  the  Master  of 
Wisdom  (first)  on  the  occasion  of  the  bestowal  of  the 
name,  and  (second)  on  subsequent  occasions. 

(a)  Our  Lord  explains  to  his  Apostles  the  original 
and  divine  meaning  of  the  name  of  Peter  as  signifying 
(Matt.   1 6.  19.)   the  Key-bearer-in-chief  of  the  King- 
dom of  God  on  earth,  whose  binding  and  loosing  power 
is  independent  and  supreme — it  being  conceded  to  him 
singly,  individually  and  independently,  whilst  it  is  only 
later  on  conceded  to  the  other  Apostles  collectively, 
and  by  consequence,  limitedly,  in  perfect  subordination 
to  the  visible  head  under  whom  our  Lord  had  already 
placed  them. 

(b)  Again,  our  Lord  explains  the  original  and  di- 
vine  meaning   of   the   name   of    Peter    as    signifying 
(Luke  22.  31)  the  Confirmer  of  the  Brethren — of  all 
the  Brethren  without  restriction  or  exception — the  Con- 
firmer  of  the  whole  Church,  the  Confirmer  whose  Faith 
can  never  fail  because  Christ  has  prayed  to  that  effect, 
and  His  prayer  cannot  remain  unheard  (John  n.  42). 

(c)  Our   Lord   explains   the   original   and    divine 
meaning  of  the  name  of  Peter  as  signifying  (John  21. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  29 

15 — 17)  the  Pastor  of  the  lambs  and  of  the  sheep, 
i.  e.,  the  infallible  Guide  and  supreme  Ruler  of  the 
whole  flock. 

All  the  above  explanations  are  obviously  included 
in  the  Petrine  name  and  the  accompanying  text  itself, 
and  are  regarded  in  that  light  by  all  ancient  com- 
mentators. 

In  short,  the  very  name  of  Peter  was  conferred 
of  set  purpose  by  our  Lord  as  being  in  itself,  and  by 
itself  alone,  both  the  best  reminder  and  the  most  ob- 
vious proof  of  Peter's  divine  commission  and  office 
as  the  Christ  or  the  Rock  officially  continued  as 
supreme  ruler,  infallible  teacher  and  sovereign  pon- 
tiff of  the  Christian  brotherhood. 

Infallibility. 

A  glance  at  the  central  Petrine  text  will  suffice 
to  convince  the  reader. 

"And  I  say  to  thee :  that  thou  art  Rock  and  upon 
this  Rock  I  will  build  my  Church,  and  the  gates  of 
hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it:"  Matt.  16.  18. 

Our  Lord  begins  by  reminding  his  hearers  of  the 
essential  veracity  of  Him  who  addresses  them:  "And 
/  say  to  thee" — i.  e.,  I,  who  am  Truth  itself  (John  14. 
6) — I,  who  am  the  Eternal  Word  of  God  (John  i.  i) 
— I,  whose  word  shall  abide  whilst  heaven  and  earth 
shall  pass  away  (Matt.  24.  35) — I  say  that  my  Church 
shall  be  built  on  Peter. 

Therefore,  according  to  our  Lord,  His  Church  has 
no  existence  outside  of  Peter.  Or,  to  put  our  Lord's 
teaching  in  a  still  more  intelligible  form,  out  of  Peter 
there  is  no  Church  of  Christ  and,  consequently,  no 


30  Peter's  Name; 

salvation.  Every  church  not  built  on  Peter  shall 
fall  a  prey  to  the  powers  of  hell. 

Now,  a  living  and  divine  Foundation  out  of  which 
there  can  be  no  divine  Church,  no  "pillar  and  ground 
of  the  truth"  (i  Tim.  3.  15) — a  living  and  divine 
Foundation  which,  according  to  the  Lord's  promise, 
shall  ever  prevent  the  gates  of  hell  from  prevailing 
against  the  Church,  i.  e.,  from  seducing  her  into  heresy, 
schism,  and  apostasy — such  a  living  and  divine  Founda- 
dation  (it  is  evident)  must  of  necessity  be  an  infallible 
Guide  to  heaven.  Else  we  would  have  the  monstrous 
anomaly  of  an  infallible  Church  built  on  a  fallible 
foundation  and  yet  vitally  inseparable  therefrom.  Or, 
— in  the  hypothesis  of  a  fallible  Church  built  on  an 
equally  fallible  foundation, — if  the  Foundation  which 
our  Lord  Himself  declares  essentially  inseparable  from 
His  Church,  is  at  the  same  time  officially  fallible  and 
liable  to  err — then  it  follows  that  the  divine  Church 
must,  willing  or  nilling,  cling  to  a  false  and  mislead- 
ing Foundation  under  pain  of  ceasing  to  be  the  Church 
of  God  and  of  being  eternally  lost! 

Surely,  the  living  and  divine  Foundation  out  of 
which  there  can  be  no  Church  of  Christ  and  from 
which  the  Church  is  perpetually  drawing  her  immunity 
from  the  destructive  errors  signified  by  the  gates  of 
hell — must  be  able  to  discern  infallibly  truth  and  error : 
else  it  would  unwittingly  lend  itself  to  deceivers  and 
would  thus  become  the  unconscious  prop  or  inept  abet- 
tor of  falsehood,  the  prop  of  heresy  and  wickedness. 
Thus,  the  Christ-established  Foundation  would  be- 
come the  most  dreadful  underminer,  dissolvent  and 
disrupter  of  the  very  Church  which  it  was  divinely 
and  explicitly  intended  to  perpetuate. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  31 

Supremacy 

It  is  not  enough  for  the  Foundation  of  the  Church 
to  be  inerrant  and  infallible — i.  e.,  to  be  able  to  dis- 
tinguish between  truth  and  error,  between  true  and 
false  teachers;  in  a  word,  between  those  who  should 
and  those  who  should  not  be  allowed  to  rest  in  peace  on 
the  Rock  of  the  Church.  The  living  Foundation  must, 
moreover,  wield  adequate  authority  on  each  and  every 
member  that  claims  its  recognition,  as  implied  in 
Church  membership.  The  living  Foundation  must 
have  direct  and  continuous  control  over  the  sheep  as 
well  as  over  the  lambs,  in  order  to  eliminate  the  bad 
or  dangerous  and  watch  over  the  good  members  of  the 
Flock. 

Shorn  of  that  adequate  control  over  every  member, 
the  living  Foundation  becomes  a  mere  stage-potentate, 
a  solemn  manikin,  a  King  Log,  and  must  passively 
lend  itself  to  numberless  heresy-breeders  or  schism- 
mongers,  who  would  remain  upon  the  unwilling  Foun- 
dation in  spite  and  in  defiance  of  the  Foundation  itself, 
and  could  boldly  reply  to  all  opponents:  "We  are 
grounded  on  the  Foundation  of  the  Rock  established 
by  Christ  Jesus,  and  we  are  therefore  members  of  the 
Church — the  express  will  of  the  living  Foundation 
to  the  contrary  notwithstanding!" 

Thus  left  at  the  mercy  of  all  heretics  and  schis- 
matics, the  Church  would  be  compelled  to  harbor  them 
all — compelled  to  foster  a  brood  of  serpents  in  her 
bosom  and  to  die  eventually  the  ignominious  death  of 
a  moral  suicide.  In  a  word,  shorn  of  infallibility,  the 
living  foundation  would  unwittingly  lend  its  counte- 
nance to  error;  shorn  of  supremacy,  the  living  Foun- 


32  Peter's  Name; 

dation  would  be  compelled  to  lie  ignominiously  and 
groan  helplessly  (like  the  sects)  under  every  form  of 
error  and  falsehood.  In  either  case,  instead  of  being 
a  boon  and  a  blessing,  the  living  Foundation  would 
be  "a  scandal  in  your  brother's  way"  (Rom.  14.  13) — 
instead  of  being  a  guiding  light,  it  would  be  "a  stumb- 
ling block....  before  the  blind:"  (Levit.  19.  14.) 

Therefore,  either  the  living  Foundation  of  the 
Church  is  a  stumbling  block  and  a  scandal,  or  it  is  in- 
fallible in  doctrine  and  supreme  in  authority. 

And  this  is  precisely  the  lesson  which  the  word 
of  God  spells  out  in  the  name  of  Peter  or  Cephas 

Peter  is  infallible:  why?  His  very  name  tells  you 
why,  viz.,  because  he  is  the  Rock  that  can  never  be 
blown  about,  "tossed  to  and  fro  and  carried  about," 
like  shifting  sands,  "by  every  wind  of  doctrine." 
Eph.  4.  14. 

Peter  is  supreme  Ruler :  why  ?  His  very  name  tells 
you  why,  viz.,  because  he  is  the  Rock  that  makes  the 
Church  hell-proof  and  invincible  (Matt.  16.  18)  by 
the  virtue  and  force  he  imparts  to  her  members  by 
means  of  his  full  adequate  control  and  authority  over 
each  and  every  one  of  them. 

Without  the  sceptre  of  supremacy  how  could  he 
protect  the  Church  against  the  gates  of  hell?  How 
could  he  confirm,  strengthen,  compact  together  and 
energize  a  body  whose  members  are  exempt  from  and 
elude  his  beneficial  control  and  sovereignty? 

Therefore  it  is  that  Christ  made  His  own  funda- 
mental office  as  teacher,  ruler  and  priest,  so  absolutely 
inseparable  from  his  successor  Simon  Peter,  that  He 
made  it  impossible  to  name  Peter  without  naming, 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  33 

in  the  same  word  and  in  the  same  breath,  the  funda- 
mental office  bequeathed  to  the  same  august  person- 
age. 

The  East  and  the  West  unite  in  acknowledging 
that  the  Word  of  God  proclaims,  in  and  through  the 
name  itself  of  Peter,  the  latter's  inheritance  of  Christ's 
divine  office  as  the  infallible  guide  and  supreme  Shep- 
herd of  the  Fold. 


PETER'S  NAME 


34  Peter's  Name; 

NOTE  IV 


Scriptural  meaning  of  Peter's  name  according  to  the  Fathers 

Scriptural  meaning  of  Peter's  name  according  to 
ST.  JOHN  CHRYSOSTOM  : 

"When  I  name  Peter,  I  name  that  unbroken  Rock, 
that  firm  Foundation,  the  great  Apostle,  the  First  of 
the  Disciples."  (Horn,  de  Poenitentia. ) 

"He  that  was  really  Peter  both  in  name  and  in 
deed!'  (Id.  on  text.) 

"The  support  of  the  Faith."  (Horn,  on  the  Ten 
Thousand  Talents.) 

"The  Leader  of  that  Choir."— viz.,  the  Apostolic 
College — "the  Mouth  of  the  Apostles,  the  Head  of 
that  Family,  the  Governor  of  the  whole  world,  the 
Foundation  of  the  Church."  (Horn,  in  illud:  Hoc 
scitote.) 

"The  basis  of  the  Church."  (Horn,  in  illud:  Vidi 
Dominum.) 

"The  basis  of  the  Faith!'  (Contra  Lud.  et  theat.) 

Speaking  of  the  same  blessed  Apostle,  St.  Chry- 
sostom  still  more  emphatically  remarks :  "Christ  in- 
serted in  His  name  a  guarantee  and  a  sign  of  solidity 
of  Faith."  (In  illud:  Paulus  vocatus.) 


Scriptural  meaning  of  Peter's  name  according  to 
ORIGIN  : 

"That  great  Foundation  of  the  Church  and  most 
solid  Rock  on  which  Christ  founded  His  Church." 
(In  Exod.,  Horn.  5.  n.  4.) 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  35 

According  to  the  COUNCIL,  OF  CHALCEDON  (A.  D. 
451)  ''St.  Peter  is  the  Rock  and  foundation  of  the 
Catholic  Church  and  the  Basis  of  the  orthodox  Faith." 
(Act.  3  etc.  in  deposing  Dioscorus.) 

Scriptural  meaning  of  Peter's  name  according  to 
SERGIUS,  Metropolitan  of  Cyprus,  A.  D.  643 : 

"O  holy  Head,  Christ  our  God  hath  destined  the 
Apostolic  See  to  be  an  immovable  foundation:  pillar 
of  the  Faith!  For,  thou  art,  as  the  Divine  Word 
truly  said,  PETER,  and  on  thee  as  on  a  foundation- 
stone  have  the  pillars  of  the  Church  been  fixed" 
(Lat.  i,  Sess.  2.,  Labbe  t.  7.,  p.  125.) 

Scriptural  meaning  of  Peter's  name  according  to 
ST.  THEODORE  of  Studium,  A.  D.  826: 

"O  Apostolic  Head!  O  Shepherd  of  the  sheep  of 
Christ  set  over  them  by  God!  O  Door-Keeper  of  the 
Kingdom  of  Heaven!  O  Rock  of  the  Faith  upon 
which  the  Catholic  Church  is  built:  for  PETER  thou 
art." 

According  to  ST.  EPIPHANIUS  'Peter'  means  "the 
immovable  Rock."  (Haer.  59,  n.  7.) 

According  to  ST.  GREGORY  NAZIANZEN,  'Peter' 
means  "the  second  Foundation  from  Christ."  (In 
horn,  archier.  inserta.) 

Scriptural  meaning  of  Peter's  name  according  to 
ST.  AMBROSE: 

"The  Apostle  in  whom  is  the  Church  support" — 
i.  e.,  against  the  gates  of  hell.  (On  Luke  1.  4,  n.  70.) 

"Christ  is  the  Rock,  but  yet  He  did  not  deny  the 
grace  of  this  name  to  His  disciple  that  He  should  be 


36  Peter's  Name; 

Peter,  because  he  has  from  the  Rock  firm  constancy, 
immovable  Faith."  (On  Luke,  1.  6,  n.  97.) 

Scriptural  meaning  of  Peter's  name  according  to 
ST.  LEO  THE;  GREAT,  A.  D.  461 : 

"For  thou  art  Peter,  that  is,  whereas  I  am  the 
inviolable  Rock;  I  the  corner-stone  who  made  both 
one;  I  the  foundation  besides  which  no  one  can  lav 
another;  yet  thou  also  art  a  Rock,  because  thou  art 
consolidated  by  my  might,  that  what  things  alone 
are  mine  by  mine  power  may  be  common  to  thee  by 
participation  with  me."  (Serm.  4  in  Natal.  Ordin., 
c.  2,  ed.  Ballerini.) 

St.  Leo  tells  us  here  that  St.  Peter's  name  means 
scripturally  the  Rock  "by  participation,"  the  sharer, 
by  participation,  in  "the  things"  that  are  Christ's  in  His 
own  right — the  sharer  in  Christ's  fundamental  office  as 
sovereign  ruler,  and  sovereign  teacher,  and  sovereign 
pontiff  of  the  Church. 

Still  more  striking  is  the  language  of  the  saint  in 
the  following  sentence : 

"That  which  the  Truth  ordered  remains :  and 
blessed  Peter,  persisting  in  that  strength  of  the  Rock 
which  he  received,  has  not  deserted  the  guidance,  once 
undertaken,  of  the  Church.  For,  thus  was  he  set  be- 
fore the  rest  that  while  he  is  called  the  Rock — that  is, 
while  he  is  declared  to  be  the  Foundation ;  while 
he  is  appointed  the  Door-Keeper  of  the  Kingdom  of 
heaven ;  while  he  is  promoted  to  be  the  Judge  of  what 
shall  be  bound  and  what  loosed,  with  the  assurance 
that  his  sentence  shall  be  ratified  even  in  heaven — 
we  might  learn  through  the  very  mystery  of  the  name 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  37 

given  to   him   how  he  was  associated  ivith   Christ!3 
(Serm.  3  on  Anniv.) 

It  is  with  profound  reason,  therefore,  that  the 
Church  reads  in  St.  Peter's  name  a  great  object-lesson 
teaching  his  intimate  association  and  co-partnership 
with  Christ — he  being  Christ's  visible  associate  and 
co-ad jutor  and  holding  by  grace  and  visibly  the  three- 
fold office  which  Christ  holds  by  nature  and  invisibly, 
viz., — the  kingly  or  ruling  office,  the  prophetic  or 
teaching  office,  and  the  deific  or  priestly  office. 

Scriptural  meaning  of  Peter's  name  according  to 
ST.  AUGUSTIN: 

"The  Rock  which  the  proud  gates  of  hell  pre- 
vail not  against." — i.  e.,  the  Rock  endowed  with  in- 
fallibility and  indefectibility.  (In  Ps.  contra  par.  Do- 
nati.) 

According  to  ST.  MAXIMUS:  of  Turin  (7th  Cen- 
tury), Christ  shares  with  Peter  not  his  office  alone 
but  His  very  name  and  title: 

"He  to  whom  the  Lord  granted  the  participation 
of  His  own  title,  the  Rock."  (Serm.  pro  Natal.  SS. 
Petri  and  Pauli.) 

Scriptural  meaning  of  Peter's  name  according  to 
ST.  EPHREM,  one  of  the  purest  glories  of  the  Oriental 
Church,  the  most  faithful  echo  of  the  Church  of  Anti- 
och  founded  by  St.  Peter  himself : 

"O  my  disciple,  Simon,  I  have  constituted  thee 
the  Foundation  of  the  holy  Church  and  have  already 
named  thee  the  Rock,  because  thou  shalt  support  my 
edifice  in  its  entirety — [Apostles  and  all].  Thou  art 
the  Inspector  of  those  who  build  up  my  Church  upon 


38  Peter's  Name; 

earth.  If  they  attempt  to  build  amiss,  do  thou,  O 
Foundation,  repress  them.  Thou  art  the  Head  of 
the  fountain  whence  flows  the  stream  of  my  doc- 
trine. Thou  art  the  Head  of  my  disciples."  (Serm.  4 
in  hebd.  sancta,  n.  i — Hymns  and  Serm.  of  S.  Ephrem 
edited  by  Lamy,  Mechlin  1882,  vol.  i,  p.  412.) 

Most  eloquently,  according  to  St.  Ephrem,  does 
St.  Peter's  name  proclaim  both  his  supremacy  and 
his  infallibility. 

His  supremacy :  The  authority  of  the  Rock  must  be 
commensurate  with  his  responsibility  and  since  he  is 
bound  to  "support"  the  Christian  "Edifice  in  its  entire- 
ty," he  must  in  simple  fairness  and  justice  have  control 
over  every  part  thereof.  He  is,  by  virtue  of  his  office, 
the  "Inspector"  and  "Head  of  the  Disciples"  and  must 
have  power  to  correct 'and  to  "repress."  He  must,  in 
short,  be  supreme  in  authority  as  well  as  in  responsi- 
bility. 

His  infallibility:  "The  head  of  the  foundation 
whence  flows  Christ's  doctrine"  must  be  inerrant.  The 
fountain-head  whence  flows  infallibility  itself,  truth  it- 
self, viz.,  Christ's  doctrine — must  surely  be  infallible, 
for  can  an  infallible  stream  flow  from  a  fallible  source? 

Scriptural  meaning  of  Peter's  name  according  to 
ST.  MAXIM  us,  Martyr  (7th  Century)  : 

"As  the  good  Shepherd,  Peter  received  the  de- 
fense of  the  Flock,  so  that  he  who  before  had  been 
weak  in  his  own  case  might  become  the  confirmation 
to  all  (the  Apostles  not  excepted),  and  he  who  had 
been  shaken  by  the  temptation  of  the  question  asked 
him,  might  be  a  Foundation  to  the  rest  by  the  stability 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  39 

of  his  Faith. . . .  For,  he  is  called  the  Rock  (a)  be- 
cause he  was  the  first  to  lay  the  foundation  of  the 
Faith,  and  (b)  because,  as  an  immovable  Stone,  he 
holds  together  the  frame-work  and  the  mass  of  the 
whole  Christian  structure.  Peter,  therefore,  for  his 
devotion  is  called  the  Rock,  and  the  Lord  is  named  the 
Rock  by  his  inherent  power,  as  the  Apostle  says  :  'And 
they  drank  of  the  spiritual  Rock  that  followed  them 
and  the  Rock  was  Christ.'  Rightly  does  he  merit  to 
share  the  name  who,  likewise,  merits  to  share  the 
work."  (De  Petro  Ap.,  horn.  4.) 

The  holy  martyr  could  not  tell  us  in  more  forcible 
language  that  Peter's  name  scripturally  imports  the 
infallibility  and  supremacy  of  its  bearer — signifies 
scripturally  one  who  is  "a  Foundation  to  the  rest  by 
the  stability  of  his  Faith" — one  who  "holds  together  the 
framework  and  the  mass  of  the  whole  Christian  struc- 
ture"— one  who,  in  a  word,  "shares  the  name  and 
the  work"  or  office  of  the  great  invisible  Head  of 
the  Church. 

Again,  Peter's  name  means: 

In  the  estimation  of  Ignatius  of  Constantinople 
(A.  D.  869),  "Supreme  chief;  Most  Powerful  Word." 

According  to  a  Roman  Council  held  in  494,  it 
means,  "Vicar  of  Christ." 

According  to  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  (A.  D. 
451),  "Sovereign  Bishop  of  Bishops."  "Sovereign 
Priest."  "Guardian  of  the  Vine  of  the  Lord." 

According  to  the  Bishops  of  Dardania  (A.  D.  495), 
"Apostolic  Lord  and  'Father  of  Fathers." 


4O  Peter's  Name; 

According  to  St.  Cyprian,  writing  to  Pope  Cor- 
nelius,  martyred  in  252:  "The  Bishop  of  the  most 
holy  Catholic  Church." 

According  to  the  Eastern  Clergy,  writing  to  Pope 
Hormisdas  (A.  D.  514)  :  "Chief  Pastor  and  teacher  and 
Physician  of  souls."  "True  Pastor  and  Doctor." 

(See  Library  of  St.  Francis  de  Sales:  Catholic 
Controversy,  ed.  1886,  p.  291 — and  Ryder's  Contro- 
versy, 10  ed.,  pp.  12 — 20.) 

The  ancients  as  well  as  the  moderns,  then,  saw 
in  the  name  of  Peter  a  name  which  caused  them  to 
"recognize  him  as  Chief"  and  as  the  "infallible  con- 
firmer"  of  the  Faith — to  borrow  the  language  of  St. 
Francis  de  Sales.  (Cath.  Controv.,  Eng.  ed.  pp.  239 
and  297.) 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  41 

NOTE  V 


Peter's  name  means,  scripturally  and  patristically,  the  Church's 
Foundation,    Bulwark,    Capstone    and    shining   Mark 

The  divine  name  of  Peter  reveals  another  wonder- 
ful prerogative  of  his,  hardly  ever  adverted  to  by 
modern  Catholic  divines  and  writers.  As  we  have 
seen,  by  the  name  of  Peter  Holy  Writ  designates  the 
office  as  well  as  the  title  of  our  Lord,  the  Rock  par 
excellence.  Now,  Christ  was  not  only  the  Head  of 
the  Church  of  God:  He  was,  by  office,  the  most 
shining  mark  thereof.  He  was  both  the  visible  Head 
and  the  visible,  fundamental,  unmistakable  mark  of 
the  Church.  Consequently,  the  name  of  Peter  sig- 
nifying, as  it  does  scripturally,  the  office  of  Jesus 
Christ,  signifies  no  less  obviously  the  fundamental 
mark  of  the  true  Church.  Where  the  visible  Christ 
was  there  also  was  the  Church  of  God :  such  was 
the  test-sign  of  the  true  Church  in  the  earthly  days 
of  our  blessed  Lord.  The  same  test-sign  remains  and 
endures  for  ever :  where  Christ's  visible  "other  self" 
is — where  His  visible  Vicegerent  is,  there  the  one 
true  Church  is. 

The  words  of  the  text  leave  no  room  for  equivoca- 
tion. "Thou  art  Rock,"  says  our  Lord,  "and  upon  this 
Rock  I  will  build  my  Church,"  not  temporarily  but  for 
ever,  so  that  "the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  a- 
gainst  it:"  Matt.  16.  18. 

The  Church  being  built  on  the  Rock,  it  follows 
that  where  the  Rock  is  there  the  Church  is.  Christ 


42  Peter's  Name; 

virtually  says  to  Peter:  "I  myself,  the  Rock,  so  long 
as  I  remained  the  visible  Rock,  i.  e.,  during  my  whole 
mortal  life,  was  personally  and  by  office  the  most 
shining  mark  of  the  Church:  so  thou  also,  O  Peter, 
thou  the  visible  Rock,  shalt  be,  as  such  and  by  office, 
my  visible  continuation  as  the  fundamental  mark  of 
my  Church." 

Peter  is  therefore  the  highest  and  most  shining 
mark  of  the  Church — the  zenith-mark,  the  earth-com- 
manding mark  that  gives  conspicuity  to  the  Church. 
Wherefore  does  Christ  remind  us  that  the  Rock  on 
which  His  Church  is  built  is  not  an  underground  Rock 
but  "a  mountain."  Matt.  5.  14. 

The  Church  is  not  so  founded  upon  THE  MOUN- 
TAIN-ROCK as  to  conceal  it  from  sight.  She  is  built 
— as  our  Lord,  addressing  her  as  His  Spouse,  tells 
us — "in  the  clifts  of  the  Rock:"  Cant.  2.  14. 

The  Word  of  God  emphasizes  three  features  of 
the  Rock, — viz.,  its  loftiness,  its  hardness  or  solidity, 
and  its  refreshing  honeyed  sweetness. 

So  solid  is  it  (Wisd.  n.  4)  that  the  combined 
powers  of  hell  and  of  this  world  can  never  break  it: 
Matt.  1 6.  1 8. 

So  lofty  is  it  that  it  is  called  "the  most  highest 
Rock"  (Wisd.  ii.  4),  and  can  be  seen  of  the  further- 
most extremities  of  the  earth,  towering  above  the  tide 
of  ages. 

According  to  Holy  Writ,  "the  first"  Apostolic 
Foundation  (Peter)  "is  jasper" —  and  "the  wall"  of 
the  Holy  City  "is  jasper,"  i.  e.  Peter. 

The  Rock  is  therefore  both  a  foundation  and  a  bul- 
wark thrown  round  about  the  Church — the  foundation 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  43 

rising  up  all  around  the  Church,  encompassing  her, 
spreading  itself  as  a  dome  over  her  and  terminating 
in  a  sign  or  mark,  or  pinnacle,  as  visible  to  all  as  the 
face  of  the  sky. 

The  Rock  is,  all  in  one,  the  foundation  that  under- 
lies— the  encircling  wall  that  protects — the  cap-stoney 
the  PINNACLE  that  surmounts,  i.  e.,  the  divine  mark 
that  singles  out,  or  the  divine  index-finger  that  infall- 
ibly points  out — the  Church  of  the  living  God  to  the 
continents  and  to  "the  isles  of  the  sea."  Is.  24.  15. 

It  is  not  enough  to  say,  then,  that  Peter  (or  the 
Papacy)  "is  the  first  proof  of  the  truth  of  the 
Church;"  the  Word  of  God  goes  further  and  compels 
us  to  add  that  Peter  is  the  first  mark  of  the  true 
Church. 


CATHOUC  TRADITION  inosculates  with  Holy  Writ. 
For  instance,  St.  Optatus  of  Milevis  (A.  D.  370)  writes : 
"In  that  our  chair  which  is  the  first  endowment,  Peter 
sat  first...  "This  mark"— i.  e.,  the  Chair  of  Peter, 
"carries  with  it  the  Angel" — i.  e.,  the  one  legitimate 
succession  or  authority:  therefore,  outside  the  Chair 
of  Peter  there  exists  no  Church  and  no  succession  in 
the  Apostolic  line.  (De  schism.  Donat,  1.  2,  c.  2,  and  1. 

3,  c.  9)- 

St.  Maximus  Martyr  compares  the  Chair  of  Peter 
to  "a  sun  of  everlasting  light."  (Opusc.  theol.,  ed. 
Combefis,  t.  2,  p.  72. — See  Ryder's  Controv.,  Qth  ed., 
p.  16). 

St.  Chrysostom  calls  Peter  "the  Firmament  of  the 
Faith"  (On  parable  of  ten  talents),  "the  Firmament 


44  Peter's  Name; 

of  the  Church"  (In  illud:  Vidi  Dominum,  horn.  4, 
n.  3).  So  does  St.  Ambrose  (de  Virginitate,  c.  16). 
From  which  it  appears  that,  in  the  common  estimation 
of  the  East  and  of  the  West,  Peter  is  a  mark  of  the 
true  Church  as  conspicuous  as  the  sun  and  the  firma- 
ment itself.  Therefore,  according  to  the  same 
unimpeachable  witnesses,  the  comprehensive  term 
"Peter"  designates  the  most  prominent  mark  of  the 
Church,  and  is,  in  itself,  as  profoundly  observed  by 
St.  Chrysostom,  both  "the  guarantee  and  the  mark" 
of  the  infallible  Church.  (See  Wilmers'  De  Christi 
Eccl.,  p.  180). 

Enough  has  been  said  to  prove  that,  according  to 
the  witness  of  Holy  Writ  and  Tradition,  the  name  of 
Peter  is  both  the  title  of  our  Lord  himself  and  the 
God-devised  one- word- formula  converted  by  the 
Saviour  into  a  proper  name  to  promulgate  to  all  ages, 
in  one  single  word,  the  manifold  prerogatives  of  the 
visible  Head  of  the  Church.  No  briefer,  or  more 
comprehensive  formula  could  be  devised — and  no  bet- 
ter way  of  popularising  the  formula  could  be  adopted 
than  the  making  it,  as  Christ  did,  the  perpetual  name 
of  the  greatest  historical  personage,  after  Jesus  Christ, 
in  the  sphere  of  Church-government. 

It  is  the  one  term — a  term  divine  in  its  origin,  scrip- 
tural in  its  import,  and  traditional  in  its  continuity — 
it  is  the  one  term  that  comprises  all  the  titles  of  Simon 
Barjona.  If  you  call  him  the  supreme  ruler,  or  the 
infallible  teacher,  or  the  sovereign  pontiff,  or  the  fun- 
damental mark  of  the  Church — you  enumerate  but 
one  of  his  titles.  But  you  enumerate  them  all  when- 
ever you  name  "Peter";  for,  you  then,  ipso  facto, 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  45 

name  scripturally  the  successor  of  Jesus  Christ,  the 
visible  Head  of  the  Church,  her  supreme  ruler,  her  in- 
fallible teacher,  her  sovereign  pontiff,  and  her  funda- 
mental mark. 

We  can  draw  but  one  CONCLUSION  from  the  evi- 
dence already  adduced:  The  name  of  Simon  Peter  is 
unquestionably  the  scriptural  and  traditional  synonym 
for  "Simon — Christ's  successor  in  office."  Conse- 
quently, Peter  literally  affixes  to  his  two  Epistles  what 
is  naw  known  as  the  Papal  signature.  When  he  com- 
pendiously signs  himself  "Peter,"  or  "Simon-Peter", 
he  thereby  scripturally  signs  himself :  Simon  the  Vicar 
of  Jesus  Christ  as  the  visible  head  and  foundation  of 
the  Church — Simon  the  supreme  ruler — Simon  the  in- 
fallible teacher — Simon  the  sovereign  pontiff — Simon 
the  first  and  fundamental  mark  of  the  Church — in 
short,  Simon  the  Pope. 


Who  could  exhaust  the  comprehensiveness  of 
Peter's  name?  Not  all  the  Councils,  not  all  the  Fath- 
ers, not  all  the  Doctors  of  the  Church  can  fathom  its 
supernatural  depths.  Not  only  is  it  a  wondrous  verbal 
condensation  of  all  the  prerogatives  lavished  on  Peter, 
but  it  is  his  Divine  credential,  for  it  bears,  as  a  scrip- 
tural warranty  of  the  manifold  prerogatives  it  signi- 
fies, the  royal  seal  and  the  sign  manual  of  its  Divine 
inventor,  Jesus  the  Christ. 

If  we  ask:  By  what  right,  O  Simon,  dost  thou,  a 
poor  fisherman,  presume  to  command  the  princes  of 
tfye  Church,  thy  fellow-Apostles  and  their  successors' 
l?y  what  right  dost  thou  rebuke  the  arrogant  prelatec 


46  Peter's  Name; 

"lordmg  it  over  the  clergy"  (i  Pet.  5.3)?  Show  thy 
credentials.  Where  are  they?  The  humble  Fisher- 
man instantly  replies :  "My  credentials  are  in  my  name. 
Christ  named  me  and  made  me  what  He  named  me, 
viz.,  Peter,  the  Rock— i.  e.,  Christ's  "other  self"  in 
office.  My  name  is  the  Christ-accredited  herald  of 
my  Vicegerency — the  Christ-appointed  teacher  and 
preacher  thereof — the  Christ-issued  certificate  and  pro- 
clamation thereof." 

Our  brief  commentary  shall  not  be  looked  upon  as 
mere  rhetoric  but  as  having  ample  justification  in 
Scripture  and  tradition,  in  the  eyes  of  those  conversant 
with  patristic  literature.  Nor  need  we  fall  back  upon 
the  Western  Fathers  exclusively  for  the  proof  of  our 
assertions.  The  foremost  of  the  Greek  Fathers  will 
again  be  our  favorite  authority.  Ponder  the  sublime 
wonders  which  St.  John  Chrysostom  finds  in  the  Divine 
name  of  Peter.  The  Saint  has  already  told  us  that 
Christ  "inserted  in  Peter's  name  a  guarantee  and  a 
mark  of  solidity  of  Faith."  If  you  now  ask  why 
Christ  attached  such  a  guarantee  and  sign  of  infallible 
Faith  to  the  very  name  of  Peter,  St.  Chrysostom  an- 
swers :  "In  order  that  he" — Peter,  "may  use  his  perpe- 
tual name  as  a  special  authoritative  teacher  of  this 
rock-solidity  of  his."  (In  illud:  Paulus  vocatus  etc. — 
See  Wilmers'  De  Christi  Eccl.,  p.  180). 

In  other  words,  Christ's  obvious  and  specific  in- 
tention, in  giving  this  name  and  title  to  Peter,  was  to 
enable  him  to  4mploy  it  constantly  as  a  God-chosen 
reminder  and  mark  of  the  Christ-office  vested  in  its 
bearer. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  47 

The  name  of  Peter  is  the  Christ-given  credential, 
the  Christ-signed  Letters  Patent  accrediting  Peter  to 
all  mankind  and  to  all  ages  as  Christ's  successor  in 
office. 

Such  is  the  name  that  Simon  Barjona  attaches 
and  signs  to  his  Epistles:  it  is  (we  repeat)  nothing 
less  than  the  Papal  signature  of  the  Fisherman:  "Sim- 
on Peter"  and  "Simon  the  Pope,"  are  perfectly  inter- 
changeable terms. 

What  A  SHORT  AND  ROYAL  ROAD  to  the  truth  as 
it  is  in  Christ  Jesus !  Let  us  repeat  with  endless 
thanksgiving:  Peter,  ever  living  in  his  successor,  is 
the  Christ-appointed,  unmistakable  fundamental  mark 
of  the  one  true  Church  of  God. 

Now,  where  is  Peter,  or  his  successor?  History 
replies,  says  the  Protestant  thinker  Leibnitz,  at  one 
with  Protestant  scholarship :  The  Roman  Pontiff  alone 
is  the  successsor  of  Peter,  the  one  contemporaneous 
link  in  the  historic  line  of  succession  from  Peter  to 
Pius  X.  He  is  Peter  historically  and  lineally  con- 
tinued for  nineteen  centuries.  Yet  more,  Peter,  as  the 
fundamental  mark  of  the  Church  of  God,  is  the  more 
unmistakably  identified  in  his  successor  in  the  See 
of  Rome  because  no  bishop  on  earth  but  that  of  Rome 
ever  dared  to  claim  the  Petrine  succession  in  the  queen 
city  of  the  universe. 

Wherefore  the  holy  Fathers  call  the  See  of  Rome 
"the  first  of  the  marks  of  the  Church."  "Peter  there- 
fore," says  St.  Optatus,  "first  filled  that  pre-eminent 
Chair" — or  Bishopric  of  Rome — "which  is  the  first  of 
the  marks  of  the  Church."  (De  Schism.  Donat.,  1.  2, 
c.  2,  3,  4). 


Peter's  name  proclaims  him  the 

SOURCE 
of  all  Church-power  Under  Christ 


PETER'S  NAME 


Peter's  name  proclaims  him  the  source 
of  all  Church-power  under  Christ. 

By  Church-power  we  understand  the  threefold 
power  vested  in  the  Church  by  our  Divine  Lord,  viz., 
the  ruling,  teaching,  and  sanctifying  power — the  royal, 
prophetic,  and  deific  or  priestly  power. 


NOTE  VI 


A  glance  at  the  names  of  Jesus  and  Peter 
Over  nine  hundred  times  does  the  New  Testament, 
by  means  of  the  very  name  of  Jesus,  proclaim  the  one 
Saviour  of  the  world.  In  like  manner  Holy  Writ,  by 
means  of  the  very  name  of  Peter,  again  and  again 
proclaims  the  successor  of  Christ  in  the  office  of  the 
Rock — in  the  headship  of  the  Church.  For,  in  the 
case  of  Jesus  and  Peter  above  all  others,  does  the  name 
itself  express  the  office  they  exercise ;  and,  consequent- 
ly, every  mention  of  the  name  is  a  scriptural  designa- 
tion and  proclamation  of  the  office  attached  thereunto. 
Holy  Writ  itself  furnishes  a  full  definition  of  the 
above  names  as  expressive  of  a  great  and  unique  office, 
respectively — i.  e.,  Holy  Writ  teaches  us  how  to  regard 
and  use  each  of  the  two  names  referred  to  not  merely 
as  the  name  of  a  person  but  as  God's  own  definition  of 
a  jptcial  office. 

The  term  "Jesus"  is  therefore  a  divine  definition 
as  well  as  a  divine  name — and  so  is  the  term  "Peter" 
or  "Cephas". 


52  Peter's  Name; 

Meaning  of  the  name  of  Jesus  defined  by  Holy  Writ 

(a)  ''Thou  shalt  call  His  name  Jesus,  for  He  shall 
save  His  people  from  their  sins."  Matt.  1.21. 

Etymologically,  "Jesus"  means  one  who  saves,  a 
satfiour. 

Scripturally,  it  means  the  Saviour  par  excellence 
the  one  only  Saviour  from  the  evil  par  excellence,  viz., 
sin  and  its  consequences.  We  say  the  only  Saviour, 
for  Holy  Writ  affirms  that  "He  shall  save,'.'  i.  e.,  He 
and  no  one  else,  He  alone  can  and  shall  save. 

(b)  "This  day  is  born  to  you  a  Saviour,  who  is 
Christ  the  Lord:"  Luke  2.  10. 

Holy  Writ  defines  still  further  the  name  of  Jesus 
as  signifying  the  promised  Saviour,  i.  e.,  the  Christ  or 
Messiah,  nay,  "the  Lord"  who,  "born"  in  the  flesh,  is 
literally  God  Incarnate  and  manifest  in  the  flesh : 
i  Tim.  3.  16. 

(c)  "John  saw  Jesus  coming  to  him  and  he  saith : 
behold   the   Lamb   of   God,   behold   Him  who   taketh 
away  the  sins  of  the  world."  John  i.  29. 

St.  John  completes  the  definition  of  the  adorable 
Name  by  telling  us  how  He  shall  take  away  the  sin 
of  the  world :  namely,  by  being  immolated  as  "the 
Lamb  of  God."  "Jesus",  then,  scripturally  means 
Saviour  and  victim — Saviour  through  the  effusion  of 
his  own  blood. 

The  Evangelist  intimates  plainly  enough  that,  scrip- 
turally, the  name  of  Jesus  signifies  "the  Lamb  of  God 
who  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world ;"  the  Lamb  of 
God,  i.  e.,  the  Lamb  of  infinite  worth  who  substitutes 
His  own  divine  life  for  our  infinite  guilt :  the.  true 
paschal  Lamb  who,  by  being  eaten,  substitutes  the  life 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  53 

of  God  in  man  for  the  death  of  sin  in  man.  "Jesus", 
therefore,  means,  scripturally,  the  vivifying  Lamb, 
the  deifying  Lamb  as  well  as  the  atoning  Lamb  of  God. 

Does  not  the  Lamb  Himself  say,  in  the  same  Gos- 
pel of  St.  John  6.  58:— "As.  .  .1  live  by  the  Father,  so 
he  that  eateth  me  the  same  shall  live  by  me."  That  is, 
those  who  receive  me  worthily  are  made,  not  figurative- 
ly but  really,  "partakers  of  the  divine  nature :"  2.  Pet. 
i.  4. 

Therefore,  according  to  Holy  Scripture,  the  name 
of  Jesus  is,  truly  and  strictly  speaking,  God's  own  de- 
finition of  the  office  of  God  Incarnate  as  the  Saviour, 
Vivifier  and  Deifier  of  mankind  at  the  cost  of  the  last 
drop  of  His  blood. 

Nor  does  Holy  Writ  come  to  a  sudden  halt  after 
thus  beautifully  defining  the  meaning  of  the  adorable 
Name.  On  the  contrary,  the  thrilling  import  of  the 
divine  definition  is  sunk  deeper  and  deeper  into  the 
soul  by  the  scriptural  process  of  iteration.  For,  inas- 
much as  the  name  of  Jesus,  as  defined  by  Holy  Script- 
ure, means  God  Incarnate  redeeming  us,  deifying  us 
with  His  precious  blood, — it  follows  that,  every  time 
the  Name  is  repeated  in  the  sacred  record,  the  reader 
is  virtually  admonished  as  follows : 

"Remember,  O  man,  that  God  Incarnate  has  re- 
deemed thee  and  deified  thee  with  His  own  blood." 

The  constant  and  multiplied  iteration  of  the  Name 
impresses  and  sinks  not  only  the  sound  thereof  but  its 
divine  definition  and  significance  into  the  heart  of  the 
thoughtful  reader.  Nine  hundred  and  twenty-five  iter- 
ations of  the  Name  mean  nine  hundred  and  twenty-five 
burning  ejaculations  from  the  adorable  heart  of  Jesus. 


54  Peter's  Name; 

Nine  hundred  and  twenty-five  times  therefore  does  the 
Word-  of  God  cry  out:  "Remember  thou,  O  reader 
of  the  Word :  remember  thou,  O  hearer  of  the  Word, 
that  God  Incarnate  has  redeemed  thee  and  deified  thee 
with  his  own  blood." 

Viewed  in  the  light  of  Holy  Scripture,  the  nine 
hundred  /and  twenty-five  iterations  \of  the  blessed 
Name  become,  as  it  were,  nine  hundred  and  twenty- 
five  celestial  aqueducts —  the  handiwork  of  the  Holy 
Spirit — spanning  the  infinite  immensities  to  bring  the 
waters  of  eternal  life,  clear  through,  from  the  everlast- 
ing hills  and  all  the  way  down  to  the  thirsty  deserts  of 
the  human  soul,  converting  the  barren  desolate  wastes 
into  ever-singing  wells  and  fountains  of  life  and  grati- 
tude and  joy. 

Or,  to  make  use  of  another  simile — with  each  re- 
petition of  the  adorable  Name  the  omnipotent  Spirit 
sings  to  the  responsive  soul  the  old  canticle  of  Israel: 
"Let  the  well  spring  up ....  the  well ....  prepared  by 
the  direction  of  the  Lawgiver:"  Num.  21.  17.  And 
from  the  depths  of  the  soul  the  mystic  well  springs  up 
in  ecstasy  divine — up  to  the  very  lips  of  God  Incarnate, 
whose  thirst  (John  19.  28)  it  slakes  with  the  sweetly 
wooing  draughts  of  love. 

Such,  in  miniature, — aye,  in  infinitesimal  miniature 
only — is  the  practical  result  or  spiritual  fruit  of  Holy 
Writ's  nine  hundred  proclamations,  in  the  one  word 
"Jesus,"  of  the  saving  and  self -immolating  and  deifying 
office  of  God's  Incarnate  love. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  55 

Meaning  of  Peter's  name  defined  by  Holy  Writ 
Because  Peter  holds  the  Office  of  Christ  as  visible 
Ruler  of  the  Church,  his  very  name  holds  in  Holy 
Writ  a  position  exactly  analogous  to  that  held  therein 
by  the  name  of  Jesus.  The  analogy  extends  to  the 
same  scriptural  process  of  iteration — the  iteration  or 
repetition  of  his  office-expressing  name:  a  manifolding 
process  which  manifolds  well  nigh  two  hundred  times 
the  Divine  proclamation  of  Peter's  Divine  office. 

The  King's  Vicegerent  being  the  official  counterpart 
of  his  Sovereign,  Holy  Writ  very  consistently  treats 
both  the  person  and  the  name  of  Peter  as  the  counter- 
part of  the  Master  in  the  sphere  of  Church-govern- 
ment. 

We  have  no  less  an  authority  than  that  of  God's 
written  Word  to  affirm  that  the  name  of  Peter  means 
that  its  bearer  is,  (a)  under  and  with  Christ,  the  alpha 
or  co -beginning  of  the  Church;  (b)  the  visible  Rock 
or  perennial  source  of  the  entity  of  the  Church;  (c) 
of  her  authority;  (d)  of  her  infallibility;  (e)  of  her 
indef ectibility ;  (f)  of  her  compactness  and  solidity; 
(g)  of  her  one-ness  and  unicity;  (h)of  her  holiness; 
(i)of  her  catholicity;  (j)  of  her  apostolicity ;  (k)  the 
Apostle  more  deeply  beloved  of  the  Lord  than  any 
other  apostle;  (1)  the  visible  Rock  or  perennial  source 
of  anti-pharisaism — i.  e.  of  the  restoration  of  the  fal- 
len. 


56  Peter's  Name; 

NOTE  VII 


(a)  Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  that  Peter  is,  under  and 
with  Christ,  the  alpha  or  co -beginning  of  the  Church 

"Thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas":' John  i.  42.  By 
these  words  God  Incarnate  bestows  on  Simon  Barjona 
three  distinct  prerogatives — the  first  of  which  is  en- 
larged upon  by  all  commentators,  whilst  the  second 
is  frequently  overlooked,  and  the  third  apparently  lost 
sight  of  altogether. 

The  first  prerogative  sets  Peter  apart  as  the  suc- 
cessor of  Jesus  Christ  upon  earth;  the  second,  as  the 
name-sake  of  the  Lord  who  delights  in  calling  him- 
self the  Rock;  the  third,  as  the  alpha  or  co-Beginning, 
under  and  with  Christ,  of  the  Church  universal. 

Both  in  principle  and  in  fact,  Christ  there  and  then 
associates  and  assimilates  Peter  to  Himself  as  the 
first  visible  Beginning  of  the  Church — as  her  initial 
point  of  existence  preceding  in  time  as  well  as  in 
dignity  every  other  member.  For,  Christ  was  both 
the  beginner  and  the  beginning  of  His  Church — and 
He  here  associates  Peter  to  the  last-named  privilege 
by  using  him  as  the  first  material,  the  first  "stone" 
actually  laid  in  the  construction  of  His  Church. 

(i)  Our  blessed  Saviour  sets  Peter  apart  as  His 
successor.  "Thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas,"  i.  e.,  thou 
shalt  be  called  after  me,  the  Rock;  because  thou  shalt 
be  my  successor,  and  as  I  am  Cephas  the  First,  so 
shalt  thou  be,  in  the  order  of  time,  Cephas  the  Second. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  57 

Thou  shalt  bear  my  name  because,  after  my  death, 
thou  shalt  be,  in  a  measure  and  in  the  visible  order 
of  the  Church,  that  which  I  will  ever  remain  in  the 
invisible  order  of  the  same,— viz.,  the  Rock,  the  foun- 
dation or  support,  the  supreme  Head. 

"All  bow  the  head  by  divine  right  before  Peter, 
and  the  Primates  of  the  whole  world  obey  him  as  they 
do  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  Himself,"  says  the  Church 
through  the  great  Eastern  Father  and  Saint,  Cyril, 
patriarch  of  Alexandria  (lib.  Thesaur.). 

(2)  Our  Blessed  Saviour  confers  there  and  then 
on  Simon  Barjona  His  own  name  and  title  of  "the 
Rock" — "thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas" — not  in  a  year 
or  in  a  month  hence — not  after  my  formal  appoint- 
ment of  the  Apostles  only — but  henceforward  and  from 
this  day  forth  shalt  thou  be  called  Cephas.  As  I 
personally  addressed  Abraham,  the  father  of  the  old 
Covenant,  so  do  I  now  address  thee  'Peter,  the  Father 
of  the  New  Covenant,  and  in  the  same  terms:  "Thou 
shalt  be  called  Abraham,"  said  I  to  Abram  of  old; 
"thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas,"  or  Peter,  do  I  now  say 
to  thee,  O  Simon  Barjona.  The  words  "thou  shalt  be 
called  Abraham"  meant  and  were  understood  to  mean 
that  Abram  was  to  be  called  Abraham  from  that  in- 
stant, without  any  postponement  or  delay.  Similarly, 
the  words  "thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas,"  or  Peter, 
signify  that  thou,  Simon  Barjona,  art  to  be  called 
Cephas,  or  Peter,  from  this  very  moment. 

The  Church  of  Spain  was  deservedly  regarded  and 
hailed  at  the  Vatican  Council  as  the  queen  of  scrip- 
tural knowledge.  Now  the  current  Spanish  translation 
of  the  New  Testament  paraphrases  John  i.  42  as  fol- 


58  Peter's  Name; 

lows :  "thy  name  from  this  very  moment  shall  be, 
Rock."  (See  ad  loc.  the  Spanish  translation  of  Knecht's 
Commentary  on  the  N.  T.) 

In  his  learned  French  translation  of  the  Gospel  of 
St.  John,  Father  T.  Calmes  designates  the  first  inter- 
view of  Peter  with, the  Saviour  as  "the  moment  of 
his  vocation."  (On.  John  1.42) — 

The  reader  has  only  to  open  the  Gospel  of  St. 
Matthew  (4.  18)  to  see  for  himself  how  clearly  the 
holy  Evangelist  intimates  that  Simon  Barjona  was  al- 
ready called  and  known  by  the  name  of  Cephas,  or 
Peter,  at  the  time  of  the  miraculous  draught  of  fishes — 
i.  e.,  long  before  the  organization  of  the  Apostolic 
college  (Matt.  10.  I.). 

St.  Luke  intimates  the  same  fact  (Luke  5.  8). 

Let  us  revert  to  the  words  of  the  text:  "Thou 
shalt  be  called  Cephas"  (John  i.  42) — i.  e.,  "I  do  here- 
by bestow  upon  thee,  yea,  even  now  in  presence  of  thy 
brother  Andrew  (ibid.),  my  own  title  of  office,  as  a 
pledge  of  the  tremendous  office  with  which  I  will  in 
due  time  invest  thee.  And  the  better  to  emphasize  the 
importance  of  thy  name,  I  will  once  more,  in  the  near 
future  on  a  far  more  solemn  occasion,  bestow  the  same 
name  upon  thee  before  the  whole  Apostolic  college 
on  the  very  day  of  its  erection  (Luke  6.  14) — to  show 
that  thou  art  to  be  the  Rock  of  the  Apostles  as  well 
as  of  the  Disciples.  Thus  did  I,  in  the  days  of  yore, 
not  once  only  but  on  two  different  occasions,  confer 
the  name  of  Israel  upon  my  servant  Jacob — viz.,  (a) 
when  he  wrestled  victoriously  with  my  angel  (Gen. 
32.  28),  and  also  when,  several  years  later  (b)  I  ap- 
peared to  him  at  Bethel  ,(Gen.  35.  10). 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  In  a  Name  59 

But,  as  Jacob  yields  to  thee  in  dignity  and  in  holi- 
ness, not  twice  only  but  thrice  will  I  call  thee  to  the 
divine  ministry  in  store  for  thee.  Twice  shalt  thou  be 
called  singly  and  separately  (John  I.  42;  5.  10),  to  in- 
dicate thy  independent  supremacy  over  and  above  the 
eleven  other  Apostles.  And  once  shalt  thou  be  called 
jointly  with  thy  brother  Andrew  (Luke  I.  16),  to 
show  forth  the  necessity  of  communion  with  thee  in 
order  to  be  a  true  Fisherman  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Nay,  more,  in  addition  to  thy  triple  calling,  thrice 
will  I  appoint  thee  the  Shepherd,  or  ruler,  of  the  uni- 
versal Fold.  (John  21.  15 — 17.) 


The  Word  of  God  suggests  another  profound  lesson 
in  its  treatment  of  the  names  of  the  two  Fathers  of 
the  two  Covenants.  Abram's  name  was  changed  or 
converted  into  another  name — Abraham, — even  as  the 
true  Synagogue  was  to  be  converted  and  merged  in- 
to the  Catholic  Church.  Simon's  name,  however,  was 
not  changed  into  another,  but  a  new  name  was  added 
to  the  old  one.  God  Incarnate  says  not  to  Simon: 
Neither  shall  thy  name  be  called  any  more  Simon" 
— whilst  He  did  say  to  the  holy  patriarch:  "neither 
shall  thy  name  be  called  any  more  Abram :"  Gen.  ij.  5. 

The  unchanged  name  of  "Simon"  typifies  the 
changeless,  or  final,  character  of  the  Church  of  which 
he  is  the  head;  —  whilst  the  new  name  of  "Peter" 
typifies  the  new  splendors  of  perfection  which,  under 
Peter,  the  New  Covenant  adds  to  the  Old. 

But  it  may  further  be  asked,  Why  did  not  our  Lord 
suppress  altogether  Peter's  former  name?  Because 


60  Peter's  Name; 

that  name  was  to  be  a  constant,  merciful  and  Provi- 
dential reminder  not  alone  of  Peter's  low  extraction, 
but  of  his  sinful  past  and  downfall.  And  nothing 
short  of  such  a  memento  could,  humanly  speaking, 
keep  Peter's  heart  and  head  from  turning  dizzy  with 
pride — raised  as  he  had  been  upon  the  highest,  aye, 
the  unutterably  sublimest  pinnacle  of  honor  and  dig- 
nity to  which  mortal  man  can  be  raised.  For,  Abra- 
ham's office  was  but  the  shadow  of  Peter's,  a  mere 
planet  compared  with  a  blazing  sun. 

"I  will  remind  you,"  says  the  profound  as  well  as 
gentle  Doctor  of  the  Church,  St.  Francis  de  Sales, 
"that  our  Lord  did  not  change  St.  Peter's  name,  but 
only  added  a  new  name  to  his  old  one — perhaps  in 
order  that  he  might  remember  in  his  authority  what  he 
had  been,  what  his  stock  was,  and  that  the  majesty  of 
the  second  name  might  be  tempered  by  the  humility 
of  the  first — and  that  if  the  name  of  Peter  made  us 
recognize  him  as  Chief,  the  name  of  Simon  might  tell 
us  that  he  was  not  absolute  Chief,  but  obeying  and 
subaltern  chief  and  head."  (St.  Francis  de  Sales'  Cath. 
Controv.,  Eng.  tr.  p.  239.) 

(3)  Both  in  principle  and  in  fact  Christ,  there 
and- then  (John  1.42),  associates  Peter  to  Himself  as 
the  first  visible  Beginning  of  the  Messianic  Church. 

"Thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas"  (ibid),  says  Jesus 
to  His  Disciple.  Now,  the  latter  could  not  justly  and 
properly  be  called  Cephas,  i.  e.,  the  Rock- foundation, 
if  he  lacked  the  two  characteristics  of  a  foundation — 
and  these  are  (a)  priority  of  place,  or  rank,  as  the 
underlying  support  of  the  whole  structure;  and  (b) 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name         •   61 

priority  of  time,  in  the  order  of  construction,  over 
the  other  parts  of  the  edifice.  Therefore,  by  the  very 
fact  that  our  Lord  names  Simon  "Cephas,"  i.  e.,  the 
foundation,  He  in  principle,  confers  upon  him  priority 
of  time  over  the  rest  of  the  Church.  Peter  is  thereby 
declared  to  be  the  very  first  material  to  be  used  before 
any  other  in  the  building  of  the  Church. 

Indeed  the  name  of  Foundation,  or  Rock,  'given 
to  Simon  implies  the  name  as  well  as  the  function  of 
"the  Beginning" — which  is  the  very  name  by  which  our. 
Lord  calls  Himself  in  the  25th  verse  of  the  8th  chapter 
of  the  Gospel  according  to  St.  John. 

And,  in  point  of  fact,  our  Lord  does  here  make 
Peter  "the  Beginning,"  the  earliest  member  of  ,the 
Christian  Church. 

"Thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas"— i.  e.,  "not  with 
the  interior  voice  of  my  grace  only,  but  with  the  ex- 
ternal voice  of  my  sacred  Humanity  do  I  now,  at  this 
very  instant  of  time,  distinctly  and  formally  call  thee 
before  any  other  as  my  earliest  and  first  disciple. 
For,  the  bestowal  of  my  name  upon  thee  is  not  only 
a  formal  calling  (Franzelin,  Thes.  de  Eccl.  Christi, 
Romae,  A.  D.  1887,  p.  100) — not  only  the  most  em- 
phatic and  glorious  form  of  calling — it  is  moreover  the 
very  first  exterior  calling  extended  by  Me  to  any  human 
being.  This  honor  is  neither  Andrew's,  nor  John's,  nor 
Philip's,  nor  any  other's,  but  thine  exclusively,  O 
Peter,  as  My  Word  attests  unanswerably.  "Not  only 
art  thou  the  first  of  my  Apostles  by  priority  of  rank 
— thou  art  also  the  first  of  my  formally  called  dis- 
ciples by  priority  of  time.  I  do  make  thee  the  initial 
point  and  use  thee  as  the  initial  factor,  under  and 


62  '  Peter's  Name; 

jointly  with  Me,  wherewith  to  begin  the  construction 
of  my  Church.  Thou  art  the  first  thus  formally  called 
by  Me  as  a  Disciple;  Philip  shall  be  the  second, — 
Nathanael,  the  third  (John  i.  43) — Andrew,  the 
fourth  (Matt.  4.  18) — James  and  John,  the  fifth  and 
sixth  (Matt.  4.  21) — Matthew,  the  seventh  (Matt.  9. 
9)  etc. 

"Thy  calling  antedates  the  existence  of  any  dis- 
ciple— it  precedes  the  creation  of  the  Apostolic  col- 
lege (Luke  6.  12),  the  mission  of  the  Apostles  (Matt. 
10.  5),  and  the  mission  of  the  Seventy-two  (Luke 
10.  i). 

"John  and  Andrew  visited  Me  before  thou  didst, 
and  responded  before  thee  to  the  invitation  of  John 
the* Baptist  to  follow  Me  (John  i.  37) — but  after  thee 
only  shall  they  be  explicitly,  exteriorly  and  formally 
called  by  Me  to  the  discipleship"  (Matt.  4.  18,21). 

"Thou  shalt  be  called  Cephas  (John  i.  42)  :  these 
words  were  addressed  to  Peter  even  before  Jesus  had 
called  any  of  His  disciples."  (McErlane,  The  Church 
of  Christ  the  Same  Forever,  p.  89.) 

The  distinguished  biblical  critic,  Father  Th.  Calmes, 
in  his  French  translation  of  St.  John's  Gospel — de- 
signates the  first  interview  of  Peter  with  the  Saviour  as 
"the  moment  of  his  vocation."  (On  John  1.42.) — 

Neither  Andrew  nor  John, — as  remarked  by  St.  Au- 
gustin — were  called  at  the  time  of  their  first  interview 
with  Jesus.  They  were  not  therefore,  as  is  generally 
and  erroneously  believed,  the  earliest  diciples  of  Jesus. 
"It  is  manifest,"  writes  St.  Augustin,  "that  they  clave 
unto  Him  only  after  He  had  called  them  out  of  the 
ship."  (7th  tract  on  John).  The  calling  of  Andrew 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  63 

and  John,  consequently,  did  not  take  place  on  the  oc- 
casion of  their  first  visit  to  Jesus,  but  later  on,  when 
Jesus,  says  St.  Augustin,  "called  them  out  of  the 
ship." 

Rightly  therefore,  and  for  two  reasons,  does  the 
Evangelist  St.  Matthew  call  Peter  "the  first"— since 
Peter  was  the  first  in  rank  and  the  first  in  time — the 
first  in  the  hierarchial  and  the  first  in  the  chronological 
order  of  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ. 


Peter  was  cast  into  the  official  mould  of  the  Christ 
and  is  a  perfect  official  cast  of  the  divine  Master. 
Christ  in  "the  form  of  God"  (Philip  2.  6),  i.  e.  as 
God  in  Person,  is  the  life-principle  of  the  Church 
established  by  Himself.  Christ  in  "the  form  of.  ... 
man"  (Philip  2.  7),  is  the  First  visible  Beginning  of 
the  same  Church,  which  is  the  master-piece  of  all 
creation.  The  sacred  humanity  of  our  Lord,  viewed 
in  its  relations  to  the  Church,  is  first  not  only  in  the 
sphere  of  rank  and  authority — it  is  also  First  in  the 
sphere  of  time,  the  very  first  stone,  the  chiefest  corner- 
stone laid  in  the  construction  of  the  divine  edifice 
(Eph.  2.  20) — Mary  and  Joseph  being,  respectively, 
the  virgin  Mother  and  the  virgin  Foster  Father  of 
Jesus  and  of  His  Church. 

Christ  did  not  begin  (as  He  could)  to  organize  a 
visible  society  before  He  assumed  a  visible  body — 
v-  g-  by  gathering  men  together  under  an  invisible 
head  by  means  of  personal  revelations  made  to  various 
individuals.  No,  He  first  became  Incarnate  and  was 
then,  a.s  we  just  said,  the  first  visible  Beginning  of  the 


64  Peter's  Name; 

Church— the  first  in  time  as  well  as  in  power  and 
authority.  The  more  indelibly  to  impress  upon  all 
men  the  moral  necessity  of  a  visible  head  to  the  Church, 
He  would  not  allow  His  Church  to  begin  her  existence 
before  His  Incarnation. 

And,  likewise,  the  more  forcibly  to  teach  us  that 
Peter  was  his  "other  self"  (St.  Augustin)  in  office,  his 
successor  in  the  government  of  the  Church — He  made 
Peter  that  which  He  is  himself,  viz.,  the  First  in 
authority  and  the  First  in  time  or  in  calling — called  be- 
fore all  the  other  disciples  and  apostles.  Christ  began 
His  Church — as  a  society  composed  of  human  persons 
— with  Peter,  because  it  is  fitting  to  begin  a  building 
with  the  foundation  itself. 

Thus  do  the  Disciples  rest  upon  Peter  as  upon 
their  Beginning  and  Foundation  (John  i.  42)  ;  so  do 
the  Apostles  (Matt.  i.  2;  16.  18)  ; — so  do  the  Jews 
(Acts  2.  14 — 41) ; — so  do  the  Gentiles  (Acts  10.  34 — 
48)  ;  thus  is  Peter  indeed  the  vicarious  universal 
foundation  of  the  universal  Church.  (Matt.  16.  18.) 

Our  insistence  upon  this  point — Peter's  priority  in 
time  and  in  relation  to  the  calling  of  the  disciples — is 
both  warranted  and  necessitated  (first)  by  its  strange 
absence  from  the  best  commentaries  on  this  text  (John 
1.42),  and  (second)  by  its  momentous  importance — 
since  it  reveals  the  unsuspected  depths  of  the  assimil- 
ating process  by  which  Christ  assimilates  Peter  to 
Himself  in  His  royal,  prophetic  and  sacerdotal  office, 
nay,  in  His  blessed  and  glorious  death  on  the  Cross 
— as  noted  by  Tertullian  and  the  Fathers  generally. 

"Oh  how  happy  is  this  Church,"  says  Tertullian, 
"where  the  Apostles  poured  forth  the  fulness  of  doc- 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  65 

trine  together  with  their  blood — where  Peter  was  made 
equal  to  the  Lord  in  the  manner  of  his  suffering!" 
(De  Praesc.  36.  c.  32;  Adv.  Marc.  4.  5 — A.  D.  160 — 
240). 

Heretofore  the  one  grand  feature  of  resemblance 
between  Christ  and  Peter  ever  noticed  in  this  text 
(John  i.  42)  was  the  promise  of  the  headship  to  Peter. 
But,  the  other  magnificent  feature  of  resemblance  be- 
tween Christ  and  Peter  shown  by  the  same  text,  was 
not  even  alluded  to — i.  e.  Christ  assimilating  Peter  to 
Himself  by  making  him,  under  and  with  Himself,  the 
incarnate  living  Beginning  of  the  Church — the  first 
human  personality  used  by  our  Lord  in  the  erection 
of  His  Church. 

The  unfortunate  suppression  of  this  last  and  deep 
trait  of  resemblance  between  the  Christ  and  His  Vicar 
does  not  do  justice  to  the  Word  of  God,  and  gives  us 
only  one  half  of  the  Scriptural  portrait  of  Peter.  It 
shows  only  one  side  of  the  face,  viz.,  Peter's  headship 
in  common  with  Christ,  and,  leaves  out  of  sight  the 
other  side  of  the  profile,  viz.,  Christ  imparting  to  and 
sharing  with  Peter  His  fundamental  prerogative  as 
the  incarnate  visible  Beginning  of  the  Messianic  Church 
— Peter  being  thus  made  by  our  Lord  the  visible 
alpha  and  omega,  jointly  with  and  under  Christ,  of 
the  whole  Church  militant.  The  alpha :  for,  the 
Church  begins  with  Christ  and  Peter  in  the  order  of 
time.  The  omega:  for,  the  temporal  end  of  the 
Church  here  below  will  come  with  the  last  breath  of 
the  last  Pope — when  the  Church  militant  will  merge 
forever  into  the  Church  triumphant,  and  time  shall  be 
no  more.  (Apoc.  10.  6.) 

PETER'S  NAME  ^ 


66  Peter's  Name; 

NOTE  VIII 


(b)    Peter's   name   means,   scripturally,   the   visible   Rock   or 
perennial    source    of    the    entity    of   the   Church 

"Thou  art  Rock  and  upon  this  Rock  I  will  build 
My  Church:"  i.  e.,  thou  art  the  Rock  or  perennial 
source  of  the  visible  entity  of  the  Church,  since  my 
entire  Church  is  built  upon  thee ;  not  merely  a  part 
or  fraction  thereof,  but  my  whole  Church  in  her  uni- 
versal entity.  Therefore,  out  of  thee,  the  Rock,  there 
is  no  Church  of  Christ,  no  fragment  of  it,  no  particle 
of  it  whatsoever. 

Jesus  Christ  pledges  His  omnipotent  word  as  God 
Incarnate  that  He  will  build  His  Church  upon  the 
Rock,  Cephas,  or  Peter — that,  consequently,  out  of 
the  Rock  Cephas,  or  Peter,  Christ's  Church  is  not,  does 
not  exist,  and  that  she  has  no  entity  whatever  except 
"upon  Cephas"  the  Rock.  He  adds  that,  because  thus 
resting  irrevocably  on  Cephas  the  Rock,  His  Church 
shall  triumph  for  ever:  (Matt.  16.  18.) 

Ponder  the  words  of  Christ.  He  virtually  says: 
"Without  Peter  not  only  can  there  be  no  victorious 
Church,  but  there  can  be  no  Church  at  all.  Without 
Peter,  my  Church  not  only  cannot  conquer,  but  she 
cannot  even  be.  Out  of  Peter  no  Church  of  mine  shall 
ever  be:  no  Peter  no  Church." 

The  Church  therefore  owes  her  very  being,  as  well 
as  her  perpetual  victory  over  hell,  to  the  virtue  of 
her  Christ-appointed  Cephas  or  Rock — who  is  thus  the 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  67 

permanent  instrumental  source,  not  only  of  her 
triumph,  but  of  her  very  being  or  entity :  a  truth  can- 
didly admitted  by  unprejudiced  Protestants.  For  in- 
stance, Judge  Robinson,  Professor  at  Yale  College, 
frankly  says :  "Uniting  with  the  See  of  Peter,  is  to  be 
the  Church  of  Christ.  Not  to  acknowledge  the 
See  of  Peter,  is  to  form  and  constitute  a  human 
organism."  In  other  words,  there  can  be  no  Church 
of  Christ  out  of  Peter.  (An  Hour  with  a  Sincere  Pro- 
testant, by  Rev.  J.  P.  M.  Scheuter,  p.  15,  note) — 
Italics  ours. 


68  Peter's  Name; 

NOTE  IX 


I  C)        Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  visible  Rock  or  perennial 
source   of  Church  authority 

"Thou  art  Rock  and  upon  this  Rock  I  will  build 
my  Church,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail 
against  it.  And  I  will  give  to  thee  the  keys  of  the  king- 
dom of  Heaven :  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  upon 
earth  it  shall  be  bound  also  in  Heaven:  and  whatso- 
ever thou  shalt  loose  on  earth,  it  shall  be  loosed  also 
in  heaven."  (Matt.  16.  18,  19. 

That  is  to  say :  To  thee  alone  singly  and  separately 
and  independently,  O  Cephas,  do  I  promise  the  keys 
of  my  Church,  which  is  the  Kingdom  of  heaven  on 
earth,  to  show  that  thy  name,  so  expressive  of  Christ- 
like  authority,  is  no'  empty  sound — but  that  all  author- 
ity shall  indeed  be  instrumentally  derived  from  thee, 
the  Rock :  so  that  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  or  loose 
by  thy  own  personal  and  independent  authority  shall 
instantly  be  bound  or  loosed  in  heaven.  Not  so,  how- 
ever, with  my  other  Apostles;  under  thee  alone,  and 
never  independently  of  thee,  can  they  exercise  such 
powers  in  my  Church.  Therefore  do  I  not  say  to  any  of 
them  as  I  do  to  thee  "I  shall  give  thee,  James — or  to 
thee,  John — or  to  thee,  Paul,  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.»  But,  after  giving  thee  alone,  O  Kepha,  full 
and  independent  authority  such  as  I  myself  exercise,  I 
will  transmit  a  due  portion  of  the  same  from  thee 
to  the  other  Apostles,  not  apart  from  thee  but  sub- 
ordinately  to  thee,  the  visible  Head.  (Matt.  18.  18.) 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  69 

After  vesting  the  plenitude  of  authority  in  thee, 
I  will  transfuse  thereof  from  thee,  the  Head,  to  the 
Apostolic  members  united  and  subordinated  to  the 
Apostolic  head.  As  I  took  out  of  the  first  Adam  the 
bodily  form  of  the  first  Eve  (Gen.  2.  21),  so,  in  a 
manner,  will  I  take  out  of  thee  Peter  the  derivative 
form  of  authority  to  be  exercised  by  thy  fellow- 
Apostles. 

This  truth  is  so  plainly  written  on  the  face  of  the 
sacred  Record  and  was  so  indelibly  impressed  upon 
the  mind  of  the  Apostolic  Church  that  Tertullian  has 
enshrined  it  in  the  following  oft-quoted  sentence:  "If 
you  think  the  heavenfc  shut,  remember  that  the  Lord, 
here  (in  Matt.  16.  19),  left  its  keys  to  Peter,  and 
through  Peter,  to  the  Church."  (De  Scorpiace,  c.  10.) 

The  order  established  by  our  Lord  does  not  vary 
with  the  wind  of  Error,  and  the  Church  ever  receives 
the  benefit  of  the  keys  through  Peter  continued  in  his 
successors. 

The  better  to  impress  upon  the  Church  the  fact 
that  Peter  is  the  visible  source  whence  flows  all  author- 
ity, Christ  begins  by  investing  Peter  alone  with  the 
plenitude  of  power  in  the  Church.  (Matt.  16.  18; 
John  21.  15.)  In  due  time  the  Apostles  receive  juris- 
diction from  Christ  and  Peter  acting  jointly  as  a  moral 
unit  (Matt.  18.  18;  Mark  16.  15;  John  20.  21) — 
but  they  receive  it  collectively,  i.  e.,  corporately; — con- 
sequently, they  receive  it  as  divinely  constituted  under 
their  visible  head,  Peter :  for,  the  head  rules  the  body. 
In  the  two  orders  of  nature  and  of  super-nature, 
guidance  (authority)  proceeds  from  the  head  to  the 
members,  not  from  the  members  to  the  head.  "Beatus 


70  Peter's  Name; 

Petrus  et  praeferri  omnibus  Apostolis  meruit  et  claves 
regni  coelorum  communicandas  caeteris  solus  accepit." 
(S.  Optatus;  de  Schism.  Donat.  contra.  Parmen.,  1.  7, 
c.  3  et  1.  2,  c.  2.) 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  71 

NOTE  X 


Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  visible  Rock  or  perennial 
source  of  the  infallibility   of  the   Church 

Alluding  to  the  invincible  strength  of  the  Rock 
created  and  established  by  Himself,  our  Lord  says  to 
Peter:  "Simon,  Simon,  behold  satan  hath  desired  to 
have  you  that  he  may  sift  you" — i.  e.,  all  of  you,  My 
Apostles — "as  wheat,  but  I  have  prayed  for  THE)£  that 
thy  faith  fail  not:  and  thou,  being  once  converted, 
confirm  thy  brethren."  (Luke  22.  31.) 

"I  have  prayed  for  TH££  that  thy  faith  fail  not," 
that  is  to  say :  I  have  made  thee  the  Rock  of  Faith, 
the  Rock  of  infallibilty.  For  thy  fellow-Apostles  also 
have  I  prayed,  asking  my  Father  to  bless  them  as 
members  of  the  Apostolic  college — but  for  thee  alone 
have  I  asked  my  Father  a  special  blessing,  i.  e.,  that  He 
may  bless  thee  as  the  visible  head  of  the  Apostolic  body 
and  of  my  whole  Church.  As  the  authority  of  the 
Apostolic  members  is  conditioned  upon  strict  union 
with  and  subordination  to  Peter — for  nowhere  have  I 
given  them  the  power  to  bind  and  to  loose  separately 
from  their  head,  Simon  Peter  (Matt.  18.  18) — so  is 
their  immunity  from  error  derived  from  the  same 
source  and  upon  the  same  conditions.  Through  Peter 
alone  do  I  transmit  my  Keys  or  authority  to  the 
Church,  and  through  Peter  alone  do  I  transmit  my 
infallible  teaching  to  her.  I  might  have  imparted  in- 
fallibility to  every  bishop  separately  and  independently. 


72  Peter's  Name; 

Why  do  I  not  choose  to  do  it?  Because  I  am  the  in- 
finite Wisdom  of  God,  and  human  wisdom  itself, 
shortsighted  as  it  is,  sees  at  a  glance  that  a  system  of 
independent  infallible  teachers  would  open  the  door  to 
schism  and  divisions  without  end.  Therefore  am  I 
pleased  to  appoint  one  Apostle  alone  as  the  supreme, 
infallible  Rule  of  Faith,  endowing  him  alone  with  full 
independent  infallibility — an  infallibility  which  the 
other  Apostles  can  only  share  proportionately  through 
the  channel  of  communion  with  Peter :  for,  Peter  is  the 
Confirmer  of  all  the  brethren,  the  Apostles  not  ex- 
cepted. 

"Satan  hath  desired  to  have  you"  all,  my  beloved 
Apostles,  "but  I  have  prayed  for  thee,"  Peter,  "that  thy 
faith  fail  not." 

Here,  Christ  inferentially  says  to  the  other  Apos- 
tles :  Take  warning  that,  if  you  do  not  wish  your 
faith  to  fail,  you  must  cling  to  the  center  of  unity, 
Peter,  for  nowhere  else  but  in  union  with  him  shall 
you  find  inerrancy  as  well  as  eternal  cohesion.  Out 
of  Peter  there  is  no  Church  of  mine,  no  Church  of 
Christ,  no  salvation. 

Peter  is  the  centripetal  force  that  keeps  the  super- 
natural universe  of  the  Church  infinitely  more  solidly 
compacted  together  than  any  orb  in  space :  for  the 
starry  orbs  shall  one  day  dissolve  and  perish,  whilst 
the  living  Orb  of  the  universal  Church  shall  outlast 
and  outlive  all  ages  and  shall  endure  forever. 

Had  Christ  built  his  Church  upon  a  fallible  Apostle 
or  Pope,  she  would  rest  on  a  sand-drift,  not  on  a  rock. 
The  Rock  guaranteed  by  our  Lord  as  strong  enough 
to  keep  the  Church  secure  against  the  gates  of  hell 


« 

or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  73 

(Matt.  16.  18),  i.  e.,  error,  is  therefore  necessarily  in- 
fallible by  virtue  of  Christ's  solemn  and  explicit  guar- 
antee (ibid.) — 

Christ  makes  three  distinct  assertions,  viz.,  first, 
that  He  prayed  for  the  infallibility  of  Peter's  Faith 
(Luke  22.  32) — second,  that  His  own  Prayer  as  God 
Incarnate  is  always  heard  (John  11.42) — and  third, 
that  Peter  shall  accordingly  be  the  infallible  Confirmer 
of  the  Faith  of  his  brethren  (Luke  22.  32). 

Therefore  the  infallibility  of  the  Church  flows  from 
Peter  down  to  the  brethren,  not  from  these  to  Peter: 
therefore  Peter  is  the  perennial  visible  source  of  In- 
fallibility. 

In  Gal.  i.  1 8,  the  Holy  Ghost  uses,  in  honor  of 
Peter  exclusively,  a  word  employed  in  no  other  place 
in  the  Holy  Scriptures :  Speaking  of  St.  Paul's  visit 
to  Peter,  Holy  Writ  implicitly  calls  Peter  the  Divine 
oracle  of  the  Church.  For,  the  Greek  term  it  employs 
(istoresai)  does  not  simply  mean  that  Paul  called  on 
Peter:  it  implies  that  he  consulted  Peter  as  a  divine 
oracle.  Such  is  the  classical  significance  of  the  word 
in  Greek  authors — v.  g.  in  Euripides,  Ion  1547 — etc. — 
the  term  being  used  especially  of  visits  to  the  oracles 
of  the  Deity. 

Holy  Writ  significantly  employs  quite  a  different 
term  with  reference  to  St.  Paul's  visit  to  St.  James. 
The  term  used  in  this  instance  is  "eidon,"  the  common 
word  for  "saw."  (Gal.  i.  19.) 

Scripturally  speaking,  then,  St.  Paul  saw  St.  James 
in  Jerusalem,  but  he  consulted  Peter,  there,  as  the 
Oracle  of  the  Church  of  the  New  Covenent.  For,  the 
High  Priest  of  the  New  Law  is  not  inferior  to  the 


74  Peter's  Name; 

High  Priest  of  the  Synagogue — of  whom  Cruden's 
Protestant  Concordance  says:  "The  High  Priest, 
clothed  with  the  ephod  and  pectoral,  gave  a  True 
Answer,  whatever  was  the  manner  of  his  life. — God 
had  appropriated  to  his  person  the  Oracle  of  His 
Truth."  (s.  v.  Oracle  and  Priest.) 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  75 

NOTE  XI 


(e)    Peter's   name   means,   scripturally,  the   visible   Rock   or 
perennial  source  of  the  indefectibility  of  the  Church 

"Thou  art  Rock,  and  upon  this  Rock  I  will  build  my 
Church,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against 
it."  Matt.  16.  1 8— i.  e.,  "Thanks  to  thee,  O  Peter,  who 
art  the  Rock  of  my  own  creation,  the  gates  of  hell 
shall  not  prevail  against  my  Church.  Neither  now, 
nor  in  a  thousand  years,  nor  in  1600  years,  nor  in  two 
thousand  years,  shall  they  prevail  against  my  Church : 
because,  from  thee  (under  me)  shall  my  Church  derive 
a  never-failing  supply  of  strength  and  invincibility. 
Sect  after  sect  shall  pass  away,  whilst  thou  alone  shalt 
stand  with  the  Church  built  upon  thee,  for  thou  alone 
art  the  Rock  built  on  the  rock  of  my  omnipotent 
Word :  heaven  and  earth  shall  pass  away,  but  my  word 
shall  not  pass  away."  Matt.  24.  35. 

Christ  proclaims  the  indefectibility  of  His  Church 
— i.  e.,  the  absolute  uninterruptibility  of  her  existence 
through  all  ages — (Matt.  16.  18)  ;  and  the  reason  He 
assigns  for  her  indefectibility  and  indestructibility  is 
that  she  is  irrevocably  built  and  resting  on  Cephas,  the 
Rock,  Peter.  Therefore  Peter  is  the  perennial  visible 
source  of  the  indefectibility  of  the  Church. 


76  Peter's  Name; 

NOTE  XII 


(f)    Peter's   name   means,   scripturally,   the   visible   Rock   or 
perennial  source  of  the  Church's  compactness  and  solidity 

"Confirm  thy  brethren"  (Luke  22.  32) — i.  e.,  all  thy 
brethren,  all  my  disciples  without  exception — Apostles, 
bishops,  priests,  clergy,  and  laity — are  to  be  confirmed, 
strengthened,  consolidated  by  thee  in  the  Faith  and  in 
hope  and  charity,  in  closer  and  closer  communion  with 
one  another.  In  thee  shall  they  find  immunity  not 
only  from  the  darkness  and  blindness  of  heresy  but 
from  the  sterilising  influence  of  schism. 

Thou  art  the  Rock,  not  for  thy  sake  alone  but  for 
the  sake  of  thy  brethren.  Do  not,  then,  O  blessed  Rock, 
keep  thy  strength  unto  thyself,  but  transfuse  the 
strength  of  the  Rock  into  the  universal  Brotherhood. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  77 

NOTE  XIII 


(g)    Peter's   name   means,   scripturally,   the   visible   Rock   or 
perennial  source  of  the  one -ness  and  unicity  of  the  Church 

"Thou  art  Rock  and  upon  this  Rock  I  will  build 
my  Church  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail 
against  it."  "Therefore,  by  logical  implication,  the 
gates  of  hell  shall  prevail  against  all  churches  not  built 
upon  the  Rock,  Peter.  Therefore,  moreover,  whoever 
departs  from  the  Rock,  Peter,  cuts  himself  off  from 
the  very  Foundation  of  my  Church.  For,  my  Church, 
in  contradistinction  to  all  other  churches,  is  built  upon 
thee,  O  Rock,  O  Peter;  and  there  does  she  abide,  not 
shifting  her  Foundation  from  Peter  to  Photius,  or  from 
Peter  to  Luther  or  Calvin,  or  from  Peter  to  any  one 
else, — but  remaining  forever  fixed  on  the  Rock  of  my 
choice  and  creation,  Cephas,  or  Peter. 

Therefore,  finally,  as  there  is  no  Church  of  mine 
out  of  the  Rock,  men  must  of  necessity  gather  around 
and  cling  to  the  Rock  under  pain  of  being  left  out  of 
my  Church.  Thus  are  tribes  and  tongues  and  peoples 
and  nations  unified  in  thee  and  by  thee,  under  Me. 
And  thus  art  thou,  O  Rock,  O  Peter,  the  wonderful 
Rock  and  perennial  source  of  the  visible  unification  of 
all  mankind  into  one  vast  brotherhood. 

And  as  thou  alone,  O  Peter,  art  the  Rock  of  unity, 
so  shall  all  the  churches  built  outside  of  thee,  be  the 
ever-shifting  sands  of  endless  division  and  confusion. 
Theirs  shall  be  the  burning  and  blinding  divisions  and 


78  Peter's  Name; 

confusions  of  the  stormy  sands  of  the  desert  when 
blown  about  by  the  simoom. 

Thou  art  by  grace,  as  I  am  by  nature,  the  Rock 
against  which  all  the  sects  or  hostile  churches  shall  ei- 
ther grind  themselves  or  be  ground  to  powder:  Matt. 
21.44. 


The  one-ness,  or  unity,  of  the  Church  is  the  divine 
prerogative  in  virtue  of  which  "the  Church  in  all  its 
members  and  parts  forms  one  entire  connected  whole" 
(Klee  on  the  Church — ap.  "Catholic"  by  Monsignor 
Capel,  i  st.  ed.  p.  26.) 

Peter  is  the  Rock  of  unification :  he  unifies  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Church  by  the  fact  that  he  is  the  one  foun- 
dation, the  one  platform  on  which  Christ  requires  them 
all  to  stand  and  to  cling  together. 

Christ  extols  the  unifying  power  of  Peter  when  He 
appoints  him  the  Confirmer  or  consolidator  of  the 
whole  Christian  brotherhood  (Luke  22.  32.) 

For,  "Confirmer"  means  consolidator,  strengthener : 
now  strength  preverbially  lies  in  unity.  Therefore  Pet- 
er the  strengthener  means  Peter  the  unifier.  Therefore 
Peter  is  the  permanent  instrumental  source  of  the  com- 
pact one-ness  of  the  Church.  He  is  the  living  Rock 
and,  as  such,  communicates  to  the  whole  Church  the 
compactness,  solidity  and  unbreakable  one-ness  of  the 
Rock  which  he  is. 

Peter  is  also  the  perennial  visible  source  of  the 
unicity,  or  absolute  anti-plurality  and  absolute  indis- 
ibility  of  the  Church. 

The  unicity  of  the  Church  is  the  divine  prerog- 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  79 

plurality  of  Christian  or  co-ordinate  churches,"  or  one 
Christian  Church  or  Kingdom  of  God  divided  against 
itself — as  to  creed,  communion,  or  authority. 

Observe  that  the  one-ness  of  the  Church  connotes 
the  fact  of  her  unity ;  the  fact  that  she  is  one  in  reality 
— whilst  the  unicity  of  the  Church  connotes  the  abso- 
lute impossibility  of  there  being  more  than  one  self- 
same indivisible  Church  of  Christ,  indivisible  as  to 
creed,  communion,  and  authority. 

Besides,  whilst  the  one-ness  or  unity  of  the  Church 
is  one  of  her  visible  marks,  her  unicity  is  one  of  her 
invisible  properties — a  property  evident  to  the  mind  in 
view  of  the  Word  of  God,  but  not  visible  or  percept- 
ible to  the  bodily  senses. 

The  sense  of  sight  attests  the  unity  of  the  Church — 
but  reason  alone  can,  under  the  guidance  of  Revela- 
tion, attest  the  impossibility,  by  reason  of  the  express 
will  of  Christ,  of  there  being  more  than  one  Church 
of  His,  and  the  impossiblity  of  the  Church  built  on 
Peter  being  only  a  part  of,  and  not  the  whole  Church 
of  Jesus  Christ. 

(First)— Christ  said  to  Peter:  "Thou  art  Rock, 
and  upon  this  Rock  I  will  build  my  Church"  (Matt. 
1 6.  18) — not  my  Churches  but  My  one  and  only 
Church.  Therefore  Christ  built  one  Church  only  upon 
Peter,  and  it  is  impossible  that  there  would  be  more 
than  one  Church  of  Christ  built  on  Peter. 

(Second)— Christ  said  to  Peter:  "On  this  Rock 
I  will  build  My  Church."  The  Church  of  Christ  being 
built  on  the  living  Rock  called  in  Hebrew  Kepha  (John 
1. 42)  and  in  Greek  Petros  (ibid.,  Greek  text) — it 
follows  that,  outside  of  "this  Rock"  there  can  be  no 


8o  Peter's  Name; 

Church  of  Christ — or  that  it  is  impossible  to  make  a 
Church  of  Christ  out  of  a  Church  which  stands  not 
and  is  not  willing  to  stand  upon  "this  Rock",  Peter. 

Now,  the  two  impossibilities  just  described — i.  e., 
the  impossibility  of  the  Church  or  Kingdom  of  God 
being  divided  against  itself  as  to  creed,  communion, 
or  authority;  and  the  further  impossibility  of  there 
being  more  than  one  Church  or  Kingdom  of  God,  i.  e., 
a  plurality  of  co-ordinate  Christian  Churches — these 
two  impossibilities  constitute  the  unicity  of  the  Church ; 
and  Peter  is,  by  divine  ordinance,  the  instrumental 
source  thereof. 

As  the  Christ-appointed  Rock  of  divine  strength  and 
might,  he  is  the  instrumental  source  of  the  Force 
whence  flows  the  twofold  impossibility  (i)  that  the 
Church  built  on  Peter,  and  viewed  in  herself  exclusive- 
ly, should  ever  be  divisible  and  more  than  one  Church, 
one  vast  organism;  and  (2)  that  outside  the  Rock 
Peter,  there  could  ever  spring  into  being  another 
Church  of  Christ — because  Peter  absorbs  all  the 
Church-producing  energy  available  in  the  Economy  of 
Christ,  and  thus  strikes  with  radical  impotency  any 
attempt  at  producing  another  Church  of  God. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  81 

NOTE  XIV 


(h)    Peter's   name   means,    scripturally,   the   visible   Rock   or 
ministerial   source   of   the  holiness   of  the   Church 

Peter  is  the  Rock  of  the  Priesthood,  the  ministerial 
source  of  sanctification,  the  Church's  Stairway  to 
heaven  (St.  Augustin) ;  for  out  of  the  Church  of 
God  there  is  no  lawful  and  acceptable  sacrifice;  and 
without  the  lawful  acceptable  oblation  of  the  Sacrifice 
of  the  New  Covenant,  there  can  be  no  sanctification, 
but  only  profanation  and  sacrilege. 

Such  is  the  scriptural  meaning  of  the  very  name  of 
Peter.  Antiquity  merely  paraphrases  Christ's  expla- 
nation of  the  name  when  it  says,  through  St.  Jerome, 
who  addresses  Pope  St.  Damasus  as  the  Rock,  or 
Peter:. "On  that  Rock  I  know  the  Church  is  built; 
whoso  eats  the  Lamb  outside  this  House  is  profane," 
i.  e.,  guilty  of  sacrilege  (Ep.  to  Pope  Damasus,  A.  D. 

376). 

Mark  how  forcibly  St.  Jerome  affirms  that  whoever 
is  outside  "that  Rock,"  viz.,  Peter,  and  his  successors, 
is  by  that  same,  outside  the  House  of  God,  outside  the 
Church  altogether. 

Centuries  before  St.  Jerome,  the  holy  prophet 
David  had  intimated  that  the  pure  honey  of  sanctifi- 
cation can  only  be  got  "out  of  the  Rock." — "And  He 
fed  them,"  says  David  prophetically,  "with  the  fat  of 
wheat"  (His  adorable  flesh  and  blood),  "and  filled 

PETER'S  NAME  6 


82  Peter's  Name; 

them  with  honey"  (His  own  Divine  Life)  "out  of  the 
Rock."  That  is  to  say,  the  God-appointed  channel  of 
the  Deific  life  productive  of  holiness  is  none  other  than 
the  Rock  (Ps.  80.  17). 

The  prince  of  the  Doctors  of  the  Church,  St.  Augus- 
tin,  is  even  more  emphatic  than  St.  Jerome.  According 
to  him,  Peter  is  so  essentially  and  perpetually  the  foun- 
dation of  the  Church  and  the  ministerial  source  of  her 
sanctification  as  to  be  her  stairway  to  heaven : 

"It  was  the  Lord  Himself,"  writes  the  saint,  "who 
called  Peter  the  Foundation  of  the  Church :  and  there- 
fore it  is  right  that  the  Church  should  reverence  this 
Foundation  wherever  her  mighty  structure  riseth. — 
Blessed  be  God  who  hath  commanded  that  the  Apostle 
Peter  should  be  exalted  in  the  congregation !  Worthy 
to  be  honored  by  the  Church  is  that  Foundation 
through  which  lieth  the  ascent  into  heaven."  (i5th 
Serm.  on  the  Saints :  Rom.  Brev.,  Feast  of  St.  Peter's 
Chair  at  Antioch,  22cl  of  Febr.) 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  83 


NOTE  XV 


(i)  Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  visible  Rock  or 
perennial  source  of  the  catholicity  or  uni- 
versality  of   the   Church 

"The  Rock"  is  the  scriptural  name  of  God  Him- 
self, and  when  God  Incarnate  conferred  it  upon  Simon, 
He  thereby  declared  that  He  would  put  in  Peter  the 
strength  of  God  signified  by  the  name :  and  He  kept  his 
promise.  Behold  the  strength  of  God  concealed  under 
the  frail  form  of  a  frail  old  man!  Behold  one  single 
man,  a  supernatural  Samson,  not  only  stronger  than 
all  mankind  together,  but  stronger  than  the  myriad- 
legioned  hosts  of  Satan:  Matt.  16.  18. 

Peter  is  the  mightiest  moral  force  on  earth,  the 
colossal  force  of  a  Ifeffiurln  world-builder.  For,  the 
Christ  who  made  him  the  mighty  centripetal  or  unitive 
force  that  compacts  the  Church  into  everlasting  unity — 
did  also  make  him  the  centrifugal  or  expansive  force 
that  expands  the  unity  of  the  Church  into  Catholicity, 
i.  e.,  into  a  world-wide  organism — the  living  expansive 
force  that  enlarges  the  tiny  seed  into  a  world  of  the 
first  magnitude.  (Matt.  14.31,32.) 

Note  that  the  unity  of  the  Church  could  exist  with- 
out her  Catholicity.  The  Church,  like  the  Synagogue, 
might  be  one  without  being  universal.  But  her  Cath- 
olicity cannot  exist  without  her  unity.  For,  prescinding 
from  the  fact  that  Christ  did  not  promise  universality 
to  any  other  Church  but  exclusively  to  the  Church 


84  Peter's  Name; 

compacted  into  one  visible  body  under  one  visible  head 
called  Peter — it  is  evident  that  a  universal  divided  body 
is  a  contradiction  in  terms :  for,  if  divided  up  into  frag- 
ments, it  is  no  longer  a  body  at  all,  much  less  a  uni- 
versal body.  The  Catholicity  of  the  Church  is  not  a 
universal  agreement  to  disagree,  a  universal  absence 
of  unity,  a  universal  disruption,  a  universal  Babel,  a 
world-wide  series  of  divisions  and  fractions.  It  is  a 
universal  unit,  constitutionally  and  territorially  uni- 
versal— i.  e.,  a  unit  constitutionally  embracing,  at  all 
times  and  all  over  the  world,  the  absolute  entirety  of 
the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ — and  a  unity  territorially 
extending  to  the  uttermost  limits  of  the  earth. 

In  a  word,  the  Catholicity  of  the  Church  is  her  own 
unity  enlarged  and  universalized:  therefore  the  producer 
and  constant  enlarger  of  the  unity  of  the  Church  is  ipso 
facto  the  producer  of  her  Catholicity  or  universality — 
and  such  is  Peter,  as  we  proved  when  treating  of  the 
unity  of  the  Church. 

Contemplating  in  advance  the  world-encircling  vast- 
ness  of  the  Church  He  was  to  built  on  Peter,  the 
eternal  Son  of  God  and  future  Son  of  David  according 
to  the  flesh,  exclaims,  prophetically,  through  the  lips 
of  the  royal  Prophet :  "With  Thee  is  my  praise  in  a 
great  Church"  (Ps.  21.  26) — "I  will  give  thanks  to  thee 
in  a  great  Church."  (Ps.  34.  18.) — "I  have  declared 
thy  justice  in  a  great  Church"  (Ps.  39.  10). 

So  divinely  universal  is  the  "great  Church" — the 
Ecclesia  magna — prophesied  by  David,  that  her  very 
enemies  cannot  help  wondering  again^at  lifer  wonderful 
Catholicity:  "The  Catholic  idea  in  religion,"  says  the 
Rev.  J.  L.  Jones,  a  prominent  Unitarian  preacher  of 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  85 

Chicago,  "is  today  triumphant.  The  Roman  Church 
has  succeeded  because  it  grasped  the  ideal  of  Catholi- 
city, of  uniformity,  of  harmony,  of  oneness.  I  am  not 
defending  that  Church  as  such. . .  Nevertheless,  the 
Roman  Church  is  the  greatest  social  protection  ever 
thrown  out  of  the  human  heart.  It  is  the  only  organi- 
sation in  history  that  has  brought  together  in  any  such 
manner  diverse  races,  hostile  nations,  and  alien  peoples. 
It  represents  beautifully  our  democratic  ideals."  (Ita- 
lics ours.  See  the  N.  Y.  Freeman's  Journal,  May  4th, 
1901.) 

"The  Catholic  Church  is  the  grandest  organization 
in  the  world,"  exclaimed  a  Protestant  minister,  the 
Rev.  J.  G.  Thompson,  at  the  morning  service  held  on 
Sunday,  April  5,  1903,  at  the  Independent  Church  of 
Christ,  Los  Angeles,  California. 


86  Peter's  Name; 

NOTE  XVI 


(j)    Peter's   name   means,    scripturally,   the   visible   Rock   or 
perennial  source  of  the  Apostolicity  of  the  Church 

I.    Apostolieity  Defined 

The  term  Apostolicity  may  be  predicated  of  the 
original  Twelve,  of  their  succession,  i.  e.,  the  Catholic 
episcopate,  and  of  the  Church  herself. 

Membership  with  the  Apostolic  hierarchy  itself 
constitutes  active  apostolicity..  Simple  membership 
with  the  apostolic  Church  constitutes  passive  aposto- 
licity. 

1.  The  Apostolicity  of  the  original  Twelve  con- 
sists in  their  being  the  original  members  of  the  ruling, 
magisterial  and  sacerdotal  body  constitutively  headed 
by   Peter,   as   essentially   organized  by   our   Lord  in- 
person. 

2.  The  Apostolicity  of  the  Catholic  episcopate  is 
the  continuity,  by  means  of  succession,  of  the  Apostolic 
Body  as  organically  constituted  by  our  Lord  under  the 
one  visible  head,  the  one  organic  centre  or  bond  of 
unity,  of  the  whole  Church:  said  visible  head  being  at 
first  the  visible  Humanity  of  Christ  himself ;  and,  after 
the  Passion  and  resurrection  of   Christ,   Peter — and 
after  Peter,  his  successors  from  century  to  century, 
down  to  our  own  day. 

3.  Broadly  defined,  the  Apostolicity  of  the  Church 
is  the  continuity  of  the  Apostolic  Church  up  to  this 
day — or  the  continuance  up  to  this  day  of  the  Primitive 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  87 

Church  as  founded  by  our  Lord  and  planted  by  the 
Apostles. 

Specifically  denned,  the  Apostolicity  of  the  Church 
is  the  identity  of  the  Catholic  Church  with  the  Church 
of  the  Apostles. 


88  Peter's  Name; 

II.   Apostolieity:  Its  Petrine  Source;  General  View 

The  striking  designations  under  which  Holy  Writ 
mentions  Peter  and  his  Apostlic  brethren  clearly  in- 
timate that  the  Apostles  formed  a  college  or  body 
whose  head  was  Simon  Peter :  For  the  New  Testament 
frequently  designates  the  Apostles  under  a  collective  or 
corporate  appellation  as  "the  Twelve,"  or,  after  Judas' 
suicide,  "the  eleven" — while  it  expressly  gives  to  Peter 
the  title  of  "the  First"  (Matt.  10.2). 

For  mention  of  the  Twelve,  see : 

Matt.  10.1,2;    10.5;    ii.  i ;   20.17;   26.14,20,47. 

Mark  3.  14;  4.  10;  6.  7;  9.  34;  10.  32;  n. 
ii ;  14.  20. 

Luke  6.  13 ;  8.  i ;  9.  I,  12 ;  18.  31 ;  22.  3,  14,  47. 

John  6.  68,  71,  72 ;  20.  24. 

Acts  6.  2. 

For  mention  of  the  Eleven,  see: 

Matt.  28.  16;  Mark  16.  14;  Luke  24.9,33;  Acts  I. 
26;  2.  14;  i  Cor.  15.  5. 

There  be  indeed  twelve  foundations  (Apoc.  21.  14) 
but  one  single  Apostolic  bed-rock  underlying  the  eleven 
other  foundations  (Matt.  16.  18). 

Twelve  foundations  in  the  fundamental  structure 
of  the  Church,  but  one,  and  one  only,  underlies  the 
others;  for  to  one  of  these  only  and  exclusively  has 
Christ  said:  "Thou  art  Rock  and  upon  this  Rock" — 
upon  this  one  bed-Rock — "will  I  build  my  Church," 
my  whole  Church.  Peter,  to  whom  alone  these  words 
were  addressed,  is  therefore  the  one  Apostolic  bed- 
Rock  upon  which  the  eleven  other  Apostolic  stones 
rest  and  abide  forever. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  89 

There  exists,  on  Apoc.  21.  9 — 21,  no  commenrary 
more  illuminating  and  more  profoundly  beautiful  than 
that  of  the  Anglican  divine  Paul  James  Francis,  in 
the  7th  chapter  of  his  fine  work  on  The  Prince  of  the 
Apostles.  He  says: 

"When  we  examine  the  twelve  foundations  in  de- 
tail, we  find  that  they  are  of  different  material.  'The 
first  is  jasper;  the  second,  sapphire;  the  third,  a 
chalcedony;  the  fourth,  an  emerald  etc.'  This  shows 
that  God  has  differentiated  the  Apostles  one  from  the 
other  in  some  sort.  There  is  not  therefore  absolute 
equality,  a  distinction  of  some  kind  is  intended.  . . . 
Is  there  no  principle  of  interpretation  by  which  we 
can  discover  which  of  these  foundations  represents 
St.  Peter  ?  Yes,  to  be  sure  we  can.  We  have  already 
noted  in  a  previous  chapter  that  in  the  four  lists 
given  in  the  New  Testament  of  the  names  of  the 
Blessed  Apostles,  St.  Peter's  name  always  takes  the 
lead,  while  St.  Matthew  expressly  calls  him  the  First. 
The  First  Foundation  then  is  St.  Peter,  and  we  see 
that  it  is  jasper.  But  let  us  give  a  wider  sweep  to 
our  vision.  We  raise  our  telescope  and  lo,  we  make 
an  important  discovery.  We  observe  that  'the  city 
lieth  four-square.  And  the  building  of  the  wall  of  it 
is  jasper!  Here  is  something  which  gives  to  St.  Peter 
at  once  an  immense  distinction.  The  walls  of  the 
Holy  City  are  built  out  of  the  material,  not  of  the 
second  foundation,  nor  of  the  third,  nor  of  the  fourth, 
nor  yet  of  any  of  the  other  foundations,  save  of  the 
first,  and  that  foundation  is  jasper  as  are  the  walls. 
Does  not  this  revelation  carry  with  it  the  whole  Petrine 
contention  ?  Our  Lord  said  to  Simon,  'Thou  art  Peter, 


90  Peter's  Name; 

and  on  this  rock  I  will  build  My  Church,'  and  lo, 
when  we  come  to  view  the  fiinished  structure  we  find 
that  the  walls  are  built  up  not  of  the  material  of 
other  eleven  foundation  stones  which  constitute  the 
Apostolic  basis  of  the  Church  but  of  the  material  of  the 
first,  that  is  to  say,  of  Peter. 

The  walls  of  the  City  do  not  take  their  rise  from 
that  apostle  who  is  represented  by  sapphire,  nor  yet 
from  chalcedony,  not  from  the  emerald,  the  beryl  or 
the  amethyst,  but  only  from  the  jasper.  Is  not  here  a 
distinction  which  reconciles  any  seeming  conflict  of 
statement  between  our  Lord  and  St.  Paul ;  the  Former 
saying  to  St.  Peter,  'On  this  Rock  I  will  build  My 
Church'  and  the  latter  declaring  that  the  Church  was 
built  'on  the  foundation  of  the  Apostles  and  prophets, 
Jesus  Christ  Himself  being  the  chief  corner-stone.' ': 

The  Church  derives  her  Apostolic  continuity  from 
the  Apostolic  Body  and,  by  consequence,  from  the 
constitutive  head,  or  organic  centre  constitutive  of  the 
same  Body.  The  head  is  thus  the  primary  visible  source 
of  the  Church-continuity  otherwise  called  Apostolicity. 
For,  an  Apostle  is  one  who  belongs  to  the  hierarchial 
body  constitutively  headed  by  Peter,  as  essentially  or- 
ganised by  our  Lord  (Matt.  1 6.  1 8, 19;  Luke  22.  32; 
John  21.  15,17). 

Therefore  whoso  is  not  under  Peter  is  no  member 
of  the  Apostolic  body  organised  by  our  Lord.  But, 
if  one  cannot  be  an  Apostle  without  being  a  member 
of  the  Apostolic  body — and  if  one  cannot  be  a  member 
of  the  Apostolic  body  without  being  under  the  Apostolic 
head,under  the  organic  centre  established  by  our  Lord 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  91 

as  constitutive  of  the  same  body — then  it  follows  that 
Peter  is  the  source  of  the  Apostolicity  and  continuity 
of  the  Apostles  themselves,  and,  consequently,  the 
capital  source  of  the  Church  that  derives  her  continuity 
from  the  Apostolic  body. 


92  Peter's  Name; 

COROLLARY— Whoso  is  outside  the  foundation, 
Peter,  cannot  possibly  impart  Apostolicity,  i.  e.,  Apos- 
tolic continuity  to  the  Church,  for  two  reasons :  first, 
because  no  one  can  give  that  which  he  has  not;  now, 
to  be  out  of  the  Rock,  Peter,  means  to  be  out  of  the 
Christ-established  Apostolicity,  which  is  essentially  cen: 
tered  in  Peter  (Matt.  16.  18;  Luke  22.32;  John  21. 
15,  17).  How  then  can  such  an  outsider  give  to  the 
Church  the  Christ-established  Apostolicity  which  he 
himself  has  not? 

Secondly:  one  who  is  not  even  a  simple  member 
of  the  Church  cannot  possibly  be  at  the  same  time 
a  chief  member  of  hers,  i.  e.,  an  Apostle  or  a  suc- 
cessor of  the  Apostles.  In  other  words  the  Apostolicity 
of  Christ  is  essentially  inseparable  from  the  Church  of 
Christ.  One  cannot  be  simultaneously  an  Apostle, 
i.  e.,  a  chief  member,  and  no  member  of  hers  at  all. 
Therefore  whoso  is  out  of  the  Church  is  ipso  facto 
out  of  the  pale  of  Apostolicity:  whoso  is  outside  the 
radical  membership  of  the  Church  is  a  fortiori  outside 
her  chief  membership,  her  Apostolic  college. 

On  the  other  hand  we  know  that — Christ  having 
built  His  Church  on  the  one  visible  foundation,  Peter 
— whoso  is  outside  of  the  Rock,  Peter,  is  ipso  facto 
outside  the  Church  of  Christ,  out  of  which  there  can 
be  no  Apostolicity:  therefore  whoever  is  outside  the 
Rock,  Peter,  is  outside  the  Christ-appointed  sphere  of 
Apostolicity. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  93 

III.  Apostolieity:  Its  Petrine  Source— a  Closer  View 
Four  elements  constitute  Apostolieity  of  rank  and 
office,  viz.,  (first)  membership  with  the  Apostolic 
hierarchial  body  essentially  headed  by  Peter,  as  organ- 
ized by  our  Lord  in  person; — (second)  the  power  to 
rule  the  Church  of  God;— (third)  the  magisterial  pow- 
er to  teach; — (fourth)  the  sacerdotal  power  to  offer 
the  clean  Oblation  and  sanctify  the  members  of  the 
mystic  body  of  Christ  the  Catholic  Church. 

Now,  we  have  shown  that  Peter  is  the  visible 
source  of  Apostolic  membership  and  of  the  threefold 
power  just  named :  therefore  Peter  is  the  visible  source 
of  the  Apostolieity  of  the  Church. 

Note:  the  ruling,  teaching,  and  sanctifying  powers 
may  be  regarded  as  the  active  matter  of  Apostolieity 
—whilst  the  sovereign  headship  of  Peter  is  the  es- 
sential form  or  condition  of  Apostolieity. 

Schismatic  and  heretical  bishops  and  priests  are 
utterly  destitute  of  Apostolieity,  since  they  lack  its 
four  constitutive  elements. 

(a)  They  lack  the  first  element,  viz.,  membership 
with  the  Apostolic  body  or  college  essentially  headed 
by  Peter  at  command  of  the  Lord  himself.  Peter  is  the 
Christ  constituted  head  of  the  Apostolic  body  (Matt. 
1 6.  18;  Luke  22.  32;  John  21.  17).  Now,  members 
severed  from  the  head  no  longer  possess  corporeity, 
and  likewise  apostles  or  bishops  severed  from  the 
Apostolic  head,  Peter,  lose,  by  that  same,  Apostolic 
corporeity  or  Apostolieity.  For  Apostolieity,  or  Apos- 
tolic corporeity,  is  where  the  Christ-appointed  head 
thereof  is,  not  where  the  amputated  member  lies. 


94  Peter's  Name; 

A  Peterless  Apostolicity  is  a  headless  Apostolicity, 
and  a  headless  Apostolicity  is  not  Christ's  Apostolicity, 
and  therefore  no  Apostolicity  at  all. 

With  still  greater  cogency  does  this  argument  apply 
to  the  heretics  and  schismatics'  utter  lack,  not  only  of 
Apostolic  membership,  but  of  Church  membership  al- 
together. For  we  know  that,  the  better  to  perpetuate 
and  strengthen  the  unity  of  his  Church,  Christ  ordained 
that  outside  the  Rock,  Peter,  there  can  be  no  Church 
of  God  whatever  (Matt.  16.  18).  Therefore  heret- 
ics and  schismatics,  being  outside  the  Rock,  Peter,  are 
ipso  facto  outside  the  Church  of  Christ  altogether.  Not 
being  even  simple  members  of  the  Church,  how  (we 
ask  again)  can  they  be  at  the  same  time  her  chief est 
members,,  i.  e.  her  Apostles  or  rulers? 

Such  a  contradiction  would  be  a  piece  of  infinite 
folly  infinitely  beneath  Infinite  Wisdom  Incarnate. 

(b)  Heretics  and  schismatics  lack  the  second  ele- 
ment of  Apostolicity,  viz.,  infallibility  in  teaching  Faith 
and  morals. 

A  bishop,  or  any  one  else,  cut  off  from  the  Apostolic 
head,  Peter,  is  by  that  very  fact  cut  off  from  the  in- 
fallible magisterial  power  which,  by  the  express  will 
of  Christ  (Luke  22.  32,  etc.),  is  to  be  derived  from 
him  alone  for  whom  alone  Christ's  prayer  asked  and 
obtained  infallibility  (ibid.) — and  whom  alone  Christ, 
accordingly,  established  Confirmer  of  the  Faith  of  His 
brethren  throughout  the  whole  Church. 

Therefore  bishops  who  secede  from  Peter  forfeit 
the  Divine  promise  of  Confirmation  in  the  Faith  (i.  e. 
infallibility)  made  to  Peter.  They  repudiate  the  di- 
vinely established  Confirmer  of  the  Faith  (Luke  22. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  95 

32),  and  become  thereby,  scripturally  speaking, — they 
and  their  deluded  followers— "the  blind  leading  the 
blind."  (Matt.  15.  14.) 

We  Catholics  have,  then,  the  warranty  of  Scrip- 
ture, besides  the  Catholic  experience  of  nineteen  cen- 
turies, to  back  us  when  we  affirm  that  those  cut  off 
from  Peter  cannot  preserve  the  true  Faith;  much 
less  can  they  teach  it  infallibly,  as  they  themselves 
explicitly  acknowledge,  since  they  never  tire  of  re- 
pudiating all  claim  to  magisterial  infallibility. 

In  the  first  place,  they  deny,  by  the  very  fact  of 
their  schism  or  separation,  the  cardinal  doctrine  of 
Jesus  Christ — the  unity  of  the  Church.  For,  Christ 
affirms  that  His  Church  cannot  exist  out  of  the  Rock, 
Peter,  upon  whom  He  built  it — whilst  they  affirm 
that  Christ's  Church  can  and  does  exist  outside  its 
Christ-appointed  foundation,  Cephas  or  Peter.  (Matt. 
16.  18.) 

Apart  from  this  radical  departure  from  the  palp- 
able teaching  of  Jesus  Christ,  they  invariably  fall  into 
other  grievous  errors:  v.  g.  the  Eastern  schismatic 
body  errs  grievously  touching  the  procession  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  Some  of  them — for  instance,  the  schis- 
matic patriarch  of  Constantinople — err  even  about  the 
valid  form  of  baptism,  falsely  teaching  that  the  immers- 
ed alone  are  validly  baptized — a  gross  error,  so  palpably 
unscriptural  and  unhistorical  that  even  the  schismatic 
Church  of  Russia  refuses  to  countenance  it. 

Let  us  suppose,  however,  the  existence  of  a  pheno- 
menon never  witnessed  heretofore,  viz.,  the  actual 
preservation  of  the  true  doctrine  of  Jesus  Christ  out- 
side the  society  which  He  founded  for  the  avowed 


96  Peter's  Name; 

purpose  of  preserving  His  teaching  in  its  purity  and 
integrity — a  phenomenon  which  would  disprove  the 
necessity  of  the  Church  established  by  our  Lord  in 
order  to  perpetuate  and  propagate  His  doctrine.  Let 
us  grant  for  a  moment  that  such  or  such  a  person, 
though  outside  the  Church,  has  actually  preserved  the 
identical  faith  or  doctrine  taught  by  our  Lord ;  it  would 
by  no  means  follow  that  such  a  phenomenal  mortal  is 
a  member  of  the  Apostolic  hierarchy,  or  even  of  the 
Apostolic  Church  itself.  His  pure  faith  could  not  give 
him  active  Apostolicity,  i.  e.,  could  not  make  him  a 
member  of  the  Apostolic  hierarchy — since  all  the  true 
Disciples  of  our  Lord  had  the  true  faith  and  yet  only 
twelve  of  them  were  raisecnthe  Apostolic  office.  Nor 
would  the  pure  faith  of  such  a  unique  individual  give 
him  even  passive  Apostolicity,  i.  e.,  make  him  a  member 
of  the  Apostolic  Church — since  many  secret  believers 
in  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  were  nevertheless  too 
cowardly  to  join  His  Church  and  lived  and  died  out  of 
it — and  since,  moreover,  many  a  believer — for  instance, 
Simon  Magus — was  cut  off  from  the  pale  of  the 
Church  notwithstanding  their  public  adhesion  to  the 
true  Faith. 

It  stands  therefore  scripturally  and  logically  estab- 
lished that  integrity  of  doctrine  suffices  not  to  confer 
either  active  or  passive  Apostolicity,  i.  e.,  membership 
either  with  the  Apostolic  hierarchy  itself  or  with  the 
Apostolic  Church. 

(c)  Heretics  and  schismatics  lack  the  third  element 
of  Apostolicity,  viz.,  the  power  to  rule  the  Church  of 
God. 

To  Peter  alone  did  Christ  commit  the  Key  of  sover- 
eign authority  (Matt.  16.  18;  Luke  22.  32;  John  21,  15, 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  97 

17) — and  consequently  a  bishop  disowned  by  Peter,  so 
far  from  having  power  to  rule  the  Church  of  God,  does 
not  even  belong  to  the  one  Fold  essentially  joined  to 
Peter  as  the  body  to  the  head  or  the  house  to  its  foun- 
dation. Not  only  has  such  a  bishop  no  power  to  rule, 
but  he  has  no  authority  nor  commission  to  preach  or 
to  administer  the  sacraments. 

(d)  Heretics  and  schismatics  lack  the  fourth  ele- 
ment of  Apostolicity,  viz.,  the  restoring,  sanctifying, 
deifying,  power  of  the  priesthood. 

To  Peter  alone  did  Christ  commit  in  sovereign  trust 
the  lawful  use  of  the  Sacerdotal  Key  of  sanctification 
(ibid.),  whose  Divine  source  is  the  lawful  oblation  of 
the  unbloody  Sacrifice  of  the  New  Law. 

A  Christian  cut  off  from  the  Church  still  preserves 
the  indelible  character  of  his  baptism.  Likewise,  a 
bishop  cut  off  from  the  See  of  Peter  still  preserves  the 
indelible  character  of  the  ordination  and  the  sacrificial 
and  sacramental  power  inherent  in  his  sacerdotal  char- 
acter. But  he  loses  the  sanctifying  power  of  his  priest- 
hood. That  is  to  say,  his  offering  of  the  sacrifice  is 
neither  lawful  nor  acceptable  to  God.  For,  as  un- 
der the  old  law,  the  Temple's  altar  was  the  only  one 
on  which  the  one  lawful  and  acceptable  sacrifice  could 
be  offered  to  Jehovah — so,  under  the  new  Law,  Peter  is 
the  one  Christ-chosen  Rock  and  Altar-Stone,  whereon 
the  true  Sacrifice  may  be  lawfully  and  acceptably  of- 
fered to  God: 

Whoso  offers  or  eats  the  Lamb  outside  the  Rock, 
Peter,  offers  and  eats  outside  the  Divine  foundation 
of  the  Church — i.  e.  outside  the  Church  herself;  and 
NAME  7 


98  Peter's  Name; 

such  an  one,  to  quote  St.  Jerome  once  more,  "is  pro- 
fane"— i.  e.  abhorrent  to  God.  (Letter  to  Pope  St. 
Damasus.) 

A  dilemma : 

The  schismatic  Oriental  bodies  and  their  off- 
shoots have  never  been  able  to  face  the  following  de- 
lemma  : 

Either  the  old,  primitive  Peter-headed  Church  un- 
der whose  headship  they  were  from  the  very  first  and 
remained  for  several  centuries — i?  Apostolic,  or  it  is 
not.  If  it  is  not  Apostolic,then  the  seceding  branches 
could  derive  no  apostolicity  from  the  parent-trunk  and 
cannot  be  apostolic.  But  if  the  Church  whence  they 
seceded  is  Apostolic,  as  they  acknowledge  it  is — then 
the  seceders  therefrom  have  seceded  and  been  excom- 
municated and  amputated  from  the  Apostolic  mother- 
Church,  the  Church  of  the  Rock,  against  which,  says 
Christ,  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  (Matt.  16. 
18). 

In  either  case,  they  lack  Apostolicity  or  Apostolic 
corporeity. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  99 


NOTE  XVII 

(k)  Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  Apostle  more  deeply 
beloved  of  the  Lord  than  any   other  Apostle 

A  very  important  distinction  should' be  insisted  upon 
here —  a  distinction  overlooked  by  the  moderns  but 
sharply  drawn  by  the  Fathers — between  the  love  of 
tenderness  (as,  for  instance,  that  of  a  mother  for  her 
new-born  babe)  and  the  love  called  "of  intensity  or 
preference,"  as,  for  instance,  the  love  of  the  same 
mother  for  her  first-born  and  full-grown  son.  The 
first  was  vouchsafed  by  our  Lord  to  St.  John  alone, 
and  the  second  to  Peter  exclusively  among  the  Apos- 
tles. 

The  fact  that  Peter  was  the  Apostle  most  deeply 
beloved  of  Jesus  is  clearly  established  not  only  by  the 
testimony  of  the  Fathers  but  by  the  clear  witness  of 
the  Lord  himself.  Christ  in  person  answers  affirma- 
tively the  question  to  which  Peter,  in  his  profoundly 
touching  humility,  would  not  return  an  affirmative  re- 
ply, viz.,  "Simon,  son  of  John,  dost  thou  love  me 
more  than  these?"  For,  straightway  after  questioning 
Peter  thrice,  Jesus  says,  "Feed  my  sheep."  As  if  to 
say:  "Because  I  know  that  thou  lovest  me  more  than 
these  other  Apostles  of  mine,  therefore  do  I  in  re- 
turn love  thee  more  than  I  do  these ;  and  I  accordingly 
intrust  thee,  in  preference  to  them,  with  my  treasure, 
my  Spouse,  my  Church." 

As  noted  by  the  Fathers,  especially  the  deepest 
of  them  all,  St.  Augustin — St.  John  loved  Jesus  more 


ioo  Peter's  Name; 

tenderly,  but  Peter  loved  Him  more  intensely,  more 
ardently.  And,  in  return,  Jesus  loved  John  with  a 
more  tender,  but  Peter  with  a  stronger  and  intenser 
love.  "Thus  parents  love  their  little  children  with  a 
tender  love,  but  those  who  are  youths  or  grown  up 
with  a  stronger  and  more  solid  love:  whence  also 
they  give  greater  gifts  to  them  than  to  the  little  ones." 
(Cornelius  a  Lapide  on  John  2.  17:  Mossman's  trans- 
lation.) 

St.  Chrysostom  shares  the  convictions  of  St.  Augus- 
tine and  exclaims :  "Rejoice,  O  Peter,  thou  who  didst 
love  the  Lord  with  a  burning  soul,  thou  the  most 
faithful  of  all  the  Apostles."  (Rom  Brev.,  Oct.  SS. 
Peter  and  Paul) — It  were  blasphemy  to  contend  that 
"the  most  faithful,"  i.  e.  the  most  God-loving  "of  all 
the  Apostles"  was  not,  by  a  just  recompense,  the  best 
beloved  of  God — since  our  love  of  God  can  only  be  the 
immediate  effect  of  God's  love  for  ourselves  and,  con- 
sequently, the  most  authentic  evidence  thereof. 

Tertullian,  born  a  little  over  half  a  century  after 
the  death  of  the  Apostle  St.  John,  gives  voice  to  the 
tradition  of  the  Apostolic  Church — then  so  fresh  and 
vivid  among  Christians  and  even  among  heretics — that 
Peter  was,  without  exception,  "the  best  beloved  of  the 
disciples:  carissimo  discipulorum."  (Adv.  Marcion.  4. 

13-) 

St.  Optatus  tells  us  that  Peter  "deserved  to  be  pre- 
ferred to  all  the  other  Apostles :  beatus  Petrus  et  prae- 
ferri  omnibus  Apostolis  meruit"  (De  schism.  Donat. 
contra  Parmen.  1.  7.  c.  3.  et  1.  2.  c.  2).  That  is  to  say: 
Peter's  greater  love  for  Christ  justly  entitled  him  to 
the  greater  love  shown  him  by  our  Lord. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          101 

It  is  objected  that  our  Lord  intrusted  His  blessed 
virgin  Mother  to  St.  John  and  not  to  St.  Peter.  The 
reply  is  obvious.  Our  Lord  did  intrust  His  ever  bles- 
sed Virgin  Mother  to  St.  John ;  but  He  intrusted  both 
the  Blessed  Virgin  and  St.  John  himself  and  all  the 
other  Apostles  and  all  the  disciples  and  the  whole 
Church  universal  to  Peter,  and  not  to  John. 

Another  objection  is,  that  St.  John  recognized  the 
Saviour  from  afar  on  the  shore  (John  21.  4  to  7)  be- 
cause of  his  virginal  character. 

Answer:  The  fundamental  revelation  of  Christi- 
anity, viz.,  the  Godhead  of  Christ,  was  revealed  by  the 
Father  in  person  to  the  married  Peter,  not  to  the  vir- 
gin John.  $t.  John  re-echoes  St.  Peter  in  the  sublime 
first  chapter  of  his  Gospel.  John  is  the  eaglet  whilst 
Peter  is  the  parent-eagle  whose  wings  lift  up  John  to 
the  heights  of  the  Godhead,  teaching  him  to  face  the 
Son  of  the  living  God  and  the  Sun  of  righteousness. 

Even  the  Jacobites  of  the  far  East  recognize  the 
significance  of  the  unique  trust  reposed  in  Peter.  Bar- 
Cephas,  metropolitan  of  the  Jacobites  of  Mossul  (A.  D. 
890),  in  the  7th  chapter  of  the  second  treatise  of  his 
book  on  the  Priesthood,  pointedly  observes: 

"Christ  Himself  did  not  confer"  the  High-Priest- 
hood "upon  the  virgin  John,  full  of  zeal  though  he 
was  besides,  but  on  the  married  Simon,  who  had  also 
experienced  weakness  by  denying  Him."  These  words 
are  quoted  approvingly,  and  as  part  of  the  tradition  of 
the  Syriac  Church  of  Antioch,  by  the  Catholic  Syriac 
archbishop  of  Mossul,  Cyril  Behman  Benni,  in  his 
book  on  the  tradition  of  the  Syriac  Church  of  Antioch 
P- 45- 


IO2  Peter's  Name; 

Christ  therefore  loved  "the  married  Simon,"  more 
deeply  than  "the  virgin  John,"  and  gave  Simon  a 
"greater  gift,"  viz.,  the  care  of  His  universal  Church. 
(See  Corn,  a  Lap.  on  John  21.  15 — 17.) 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          103 
NOTE  XVIII 


(1)  Peter's  name  means,  scripturally,  the  Rock  or  perennial 
Source  of  anti-pharisaism,  i.  e.  of  the  restoration  of  the 
fallen— the  uplifter  of  the  down-trodden  and  of  the  fallen 

Caution : 

We  charitably  remind  the  ubiquitous  Pharisee  who 
denounces,  and  affects  to  regard,  the  restoration  of  the 
sinner  as  a  "license  to  sin,"  that  he  calumniates  God  In- 
carnate and  His  Church — that  God  is  the  Father  of  the 
repentant  prodigal,  not  the  father  of  the  impenitent 
sinner — and  that  the  Divine  plea  of  Christ,  of  Peter 
and  of  the  Church,  is  exclusively  in  favor  of  the  re- 
pentant. 

Neither  God  nor  His  Church  can  take  favor- 
able cognisance  of  the  wilfully  incurable.  Nor 
does  God,  or  His  Church,  restore  those  guilty  of  such 
crimes  against  human  society  as  necessitate,  for  the 
preservation  of  the  same,  the  absolute  excision,  or  at 
least  the  temporary  "binding,"  of  its  dangerous  mem- 
beirs,  v.  g.,  murderers  and  moral  degenerates. 

Pharisaism,  so  pitiless  to  the  returned  prodigal  and 
so  slavishly  subservient  to  Dives  and  to  the  shams 
who  serve  Mammon  in  the  name  of  Religion — Pharisa- 
ism alone,  (not  the  Church)  extends  the  right  hand  of 
fellowship  to  certain  classes  of  underhand  criminals, 
unhung  and  unjailed,  whose  state  of  impunity  and 
freedom  constitutes  not  only  a  danger  and  a  menace 
to  society,  but  a  cancer  eating  up  its  vitals  and  its 
very  core. 


104  Peter's  Name; 

I.   A  glance  at  the  Scriptural  and  Patristic  view  of  Peter  as  the 
restorer  of  tde  fallen 

"And  thou,  when  thou  art  converted,  confirm  thy 
brethren....  Feed  my  sheep."  (Luke  22.  32;  John 
21.  15— 17.), 

The  words  of  our  Lord  contain  a  promise,  a  lesson 
and  a  command:  the  promise  of  a  prerogative,  a  less- 
on of  humility  and  humanity,  and  a  stringent  com- 
mand to  practice  the  two  last-named  virtues — and,  con- 
sequently, to  treat  Peter's  full  restoration  as  a  pre- 
cedent to  be  imitated  by  the  ministers  of  Jesus  Christ 
in  dealing  with  repentant  sinners. 

The  prerogative  includes  the  unsequenchable  light 
of  infallibility  which  crowns  the  Rock-beacon  of  the 
Church,  and  the  inexhaustible  force  of  consolidation 
and  restoration  ever  flowing  out  of  the  same  Rock. 

The  lesson  of  humility  and  humanity  is  conveyed 
with  the  infinite  delicacy  of  the  adorable  Heart,  in 
His  loving  allusion  to  fallen  Peter:  "And  thou,  when 
thou  art  converted,"  which  carries  with  itself  the 
pledge  of  a  full  pardon.  Yes,  "when  thou  art  convert- 
ed"— for  thou  thyself  shall  need  conversion,  O  Peter; 
and  because  thou  hast  boastfully  exalted  thyself  above 
all  thy  brethren  (Mark  14. 29),  thou  shalt  fall  be- 
neath all  of  them.  Thou  alone  wilt  deny  me  thrice 
(Luke  22.  34)  ;  thou  alone  wilt  deny  me  with  an 
oath  (Mark  14.  71);  thou  alone  among  Apostles  wilt 
be  a  perjurer  (ibid.)  and  a  thrice  confessed  renegade: 
(Luke  22.  34.)  Nevertheless,  I  will  raise  thee  up  and 
fully  restore  thee. 

The  command  which  follows  is  positive  and  sternly 
unconditional :  "confirm  thy  brethren."  That  is  to 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          105 

say:  Treat  them  all  as  I  have  treated  thee.  Confirm 
the  strong,  strengthen  the  weak,  restore  the  erring 
and  the  fallen.  Extend  to  the  fallen  the  treatment 
which  thou,  the  fallen  bishop  and  apostle,  didst  re- 
ceive from  Me.  Crush  not  the  bruised  reed  and  quench 
not  the  smoking  flax  (Matt.  18.  20),  but  receive  and 
restore  them  both. 

Restore  thy  repentant  brethren,  be  they  simple  com- 
mtmicants,  or  priests,  or  bishops. 

'Do  not  merely  lift  them  up  and  forthwith  leave 
them  unrest  or  ed  in  the  way — poor,  helpless  and  life- 
long cripples  to  be  trampled  upon  as  the  living  daily 
footpaths  of  the  pious  pharisee  and  as  the  living  public 
highways  of  pharisaism  at  large.  Restore  them  in 
full,  even  as  I  did  restore  thee  in  full,  requiring  of 
thee  no  other  test  than  the  public  profession  of  thy 
repentant  love  and  amendment:  (John  21.  15 17.) 


"And  thou,  when  thou  art  converted,  confirm  thy 
brethren." 

And  lest  it  be  pharisaically  believed  that  the  priest 
or  bishop  who  denies  my  Church — even  as  thou,  O 
Peter,  didst  deny,  not  my  Church  alone,  but  my  own 
Self  personally — is  forever  beyond  the  hope  of  restora- 
tion, behold,  I  restore  thee  as  a  standing  Divine  refuta- 
tion of  such  a  pharisaic  doctrine.  For,  the  lesser  the  dig- 
nity the  lesser  the  guilt,  and  therefore  the  fallen  priest 
or  bishop  is  certainly  not  the  peer  in  guilt  of  the  fallen 
Apostle  and  Pope-elect.  Thus  the  higher  the  office  the 
deeper  the  downfall,  and  therefore  the  lapse  of  a 
simple  member  of  the  priesthood  cannot  be  accounted 


106  Peter's  Name; 

equal  in  depth  and  heinousness  to  the  lapse  of  his 
superior. 

Nor  can  thy  prompt  repentance — just  a  few  hours 
after  denying  thy  God  and  Saviour — change  the  nature 
of  thy  crime  and  alter  its  original  enormity  which  loses 
none  of  its  intrinsic  awfulness.  The  magnitude  of  a 
particular  sin  is  not  measured  by  the  length  of  time 
spent  in  its  consummation,  but  by  the  depths  of  the 
ingratitude  and  treachery  which  it  reveals.  Satan's 
very  first  sinful  thought  of  rebellion,  after  one  single 
instant  of  duration,  sufficed  to  insure  his  eternal 
doom.  And  Judas'  infamous  sale  of  God-Incarnate 
to  His  murderers,  though  effected  in  a  few  brief 
moments,  shall  ever  remain  the  blackest  stain  on  the 
face  of  time. 

What  a  fall  was  thine,  O  Peter,  when  thou  didst 
intimate  to  my  murderers  that,  so  far  from  believing 
in  my  doctrine,  or  in  my  Church,  or  even  in  My- 
self, thou  didst  not  even  know  Me !  Thy  denial  of 
Me  was  a  public  repudiation,  not  of  my  Church  alone, 
not  of  my  teachings  alone,  but  of  my  very  Person. 
It  was  virtually  an  act  of  radical  and  supreme  apos- 
tasy; though,  in  thy  secret  heart,  thou  couldst  not 
help  clinging  to  the  Faith. 


"And  thou,  when  thou  art  converted,  confirm  thy 
brethren." 

The  greater  the  grace  received  the  less  excusable 
the  recreant  recipient  thereof.  Now,  not  one  of  the 
erring  sheep  of  the  priestly  Order  shall  ever  be  bless- 
ed as  superlatively  as  thou  hast  been,  O  Peter.  For 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          107 

thou  hast  been  blessed  (a)  with  the  bestowal  of  my 
own  Divine  headship  over  the  Church,  even  before  my 
ascension  to  heaven;  (b)  with  the  boon  of  my  visible 
Presence  and  companionship  for  three  years;  (c)  with 
the  revelation  of  my  divinity,  directly  vouchsafed  thee 
by  my  heavenly  Father  and  at  my  prayer;  (d)  with 
the  sight  of  my  miracles,  many  of  which  were  wrought 
for  thine  own  especial  benefit.  Thou  hast  seen  me 
heal  the  sick  and  raise  the  dead.  Thou  hast  been  the 
eye-witness  of  the  instantaneous  raising  of  Lazarus 
from  the  putrefaction  of  the  grave  to  perfect  health. 
In  a  word,  thou  hast  known  Me  and  even  seen  Me  at 
work  for  three  years  as  the  sovereign  Lord  of  life  and 
death. 

But,  remember,  not  one  of  my  poor  lapsed  priests 
and  bishops  will,  in  the  future,  enjoy  such  extraordi- 
nary blessings  and  safeguards  against  a  possible  denial 
of  the  divinity  of  my  Church. 

Be  thou  then,  O  Peter,  both  their  uplifter  and  their 
restorer;  the  more  readily  because,  though  thine  own 
remorseful  conscience  (not  I)  upbraids  thee  as  a 
thrice-renegade  priest,  a  thrice-renegade  bishop,  a 
thrice-renegade  Apostle,  a  monster  of  ingratitude  and 
cowardice  sinning  with  eyes  wide  open  against  the 
known  Incarnate  Truth — yet  do  I  restore  thee  fully  and 
unconditionally.  I  inflict  upon  thee  no  banishment  to 
the  deserts  of  Egypt,  to  live  there  in  perpetual  seclu- 
sion— no  deposition  from  thy  episcopal  rank  and  of- 
fice— no  removal  or  transfer  to  some  obscure  remote 
mission  or  diocese :  no,  but  solely  because  of  thy  public 
repentance  and  conversion  (John  21.  15 — 17),  I  pro- 
claim thee  clean  and  free  from  the  stain  of  the  past* 


io8  Peter's  Name; 

and  heroically  worthy  of  the  highest  and  most  con- 
spicuous office  in  My  Church. 

Wherefore,  O  Peter,  thou  likewise  shalt  pardon 
and  restore  thy  repentant  fallen  brethren  of  the  priest- 
hood and  of  the  episcopate.  Heed  my  Father's  com- 
mand: Leave  not  the  anointed  prodigal  waiting  at 
thy  door  in  the  rags  of  misery  and  ignominy.  "Bring 
forth  quickly  the  first  robe"  and  put  it  on  him  (Luke 
15.  22).  Hear  the  divine  command,  O  Peter:  "Bring 
forth  quickly  the  first  robe,"  that  is  to  say,  that  very 
same  robe  "which  he  was  wont  to  wear  before  he  left 
his  Father's  house"  (Corn,  a  Lapid.  ad.  loc).  Bring 
forth  quickly,  aye,  quickly  the  robe  of  sacerdotal  dig- 
nity he  wore  before,  the  robe  of  restoration — not  the 
convict's  garb,  not  the  robe  of  disgrace  woven  by 
Pharisaic  hands — but  the  robe  of  restoration  with 
which  I  clothed  thee,  O  Peter.  Put  it  on  the  prodigal 
— and  bring  it  forth  "quickly,"  since  deferred  hope 
maketh  the  heart  sick. 

Let  the  reparation  be  as  public  as  the  offence — 
and  let  the  restoration  be  as  public  as  the  reparation 
through  repentance. 

Let  the  good  and  edifying  example  of  the  penitent 
be  as  public  as  the  scandal. 

Let  the  lips  that  have  publicly  taught  error  still 
more  publicly  proclaim  and  preach  Catholic  truth. 

Let  the  light  and  life  of  the  penitent  shine  far  and 
wide,  and  hide  it  not  under  the  bushel:  (Matt.  5.  15.) 
Not  thine  own  history  alone,  O  Peter,  but  the  history 
of  the  Prodigal  as  well,  cries  out  with  the  voice  of 
God  that  the  repentant  sinner  must  be  pardoned  and 
restored.  A  pardon  without  restoration  is  a  pardon 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          109 

with  the  gallows.  Study  the  inspired  account  of  the 
Prodigal's  return:  for,  "all  these  things — the  ring, 
the  shoes  and  the  fatted  calf — show  the  delight  of  the 
Father,  i.  e.  the  joy  of  God  and  of  His  angels  at  the 
conversion  of  a  sinner,  and  teach  that,  by  the  great 
mercy  of  God,  a  penitent  is  restored  to  the  same,  or 
even  a  better  position  than  that  which  he  held  before  he 
fell  into  sin."  (Corn,  a  Lap.  on  Luke  15.  23.) 

Heed  not  pharisaic  scandal-takers,  even  as  I  heed 
them  not  and  am  not  deterred  by  their  constant  clamor 
of  'scandal,  scandal,'  from  pardoning  and  restoring 
thee,  O  Peter.  Join  me,  thy  Saviour,  in  saying  to  them, 
"Depart  from  me"  (Matt.  25.  41)  and  from  my  Church, 
O  ye  scandal-takers  who  esteem  yourselves  too  good 
to  remain  in  a  Communion  whose  visible  head  is  the 
repentant  fallen  bishop  Simon  Peter.  And  know  ye 
that,  for  all  time  to  come  and  for  your  eternal  con- 
fusion, there  shall  be  no  Church  of  Christ  and  no 
salvation  out  of  the  Church  and  communion  of  the 
once  fallen  priest,  bishop  and  Apostle,  Peter.  Out 
of  the  Church  and  communion  of  the  restored  rene^^ _4Aa_ 
gade  Peter,  there  is  nothing  in  store  for  you,  O  Phari- 
sees, but  everlasting  damnation." 


The  full  restoration  of  Peter  is  not  an  exception, 
not  a  transient  freak  of  mercy  worthy  of  admiration 
only :  it  is  a  precedent,  a  Divine  precedent,  a  standing 
precedent  set  up  by  the  Saviour  in  the  face  of  all  ages 
to  command  and  enjoin  its  faithful  observance,  when- 
ever possible,  upon  the  successors  of  Peter  and  of 
the  other  Apostles. 


no  Peter's  Name; 

II.    A  beautiful  lesson— a  sublime  Injunction  faithfully  obeyed  by 
the  successors  of  Peter 

(First) — Christ  sets  up  the  fully  restored  Peter 
as  God's  own  monumental  protest  against  Pharisaism 
in  the  Church  and  particularly  in  the  sanctuary.  To 
that  end,  He  commands  Peter  ever  boldly  to  stand 
up  as  the  Christ-appointed,  living  antidote  against 
Pharisaism,  whose  satanic  object  is  to  antagonize  and 
nullify  the  pardon  and  restoration  of  repentant  sin- 
ners: for  Satan  has  sworn  eternal  enmity  and  eternal 
warfare  against  the  fallen  race  of  man.  God  In- 
carnate and  clothed  with  our  nature  arouses  the  un- 
fathomable envy  and  hatred  of  the  fallen  Angel. 

Lest  it  should  be  taught  (or  even  thought) 
that  the  fallen  bishop  or  priest  is  forever  debarred 
from  full  restoration,  Christ  Himself  restores  Peter, 
the  fallen  high-priest  and  commands  him  to  do  like- 
wise to  others:  "confirm  thy  brethren,"  is  the  order 
and  command  reminding  Peter  that  the  blessing  of  full 
restoration  is  not  the  exclusive  privilege  of  the  prelacy" 
tfLof  the  laity. 

(Second) — To  show  that  the  spontaneous  maker  of 
a  public  profession  of  repentance  and  amendment  is 
— before  God  and  Angels  and  men  worthy  of 
the  Christian  name — no  longer  a  fallen  priest  and 
bishop,  but  a  true  hero  deserving  of  the  highest  honor 
and  to  be  regarded  and  treated  as  such  in<His  Church — 
Christ  personally  crowns  a  repentant  fallen  priest, 
Peter,  with  the  crown  of  sovereignty  over  His  divine 
kingdom. 

(Third) — Yet  more,  in  order  to  give  the  finishing 
blow  to  Pharisaism,  our  Lord  decrees  that  all  His 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          in 

official  representatives,  even  to  the  consummation  of 
ages,  shall  receive  their  powers  exclusively — aye,  that 
the  entire  Church  herself  shall  receive  the  benefit  of 
applied  redemption  exclusively — through  the  hands  of 
the  thrice-renegade-priest-bishop-apostle  Simon  Peter, 
the  one  divinely  appointed  connecting  link  between  the 
hierarchy  and  the  Church,  and  between  the  Church 
and  her  Founder. 

The  vicars  of  Jesus  Christ,  from  Peter  down  to 
Pius  X,  in  their  Christlike  practice  of  the  restoration 
of  the  lapsed,  both  of  the  clergy  and  of  the  laity — have 
strictly  obeyed  the  Master's  injunction,  some  of  them 
even  at  the  cost  of  terrible  persecutions,  nay,  of  a  cruel 
death  brought  upon  them  by  the  fratricidal  machina- 
tions of  clerical  pharisees. 

And  the  one  essential  test  required  by  the  Holy 
See  for  priestly  or  episcopal  restoration,  was  the  one 
test  required  by  our  Lord  of  Peter,  viz.,  a  public  pro- 
fession of  repentant  love  and  amendment,  duly  re- 
cognized by  the  visible  head  of  the  Church.  (John  21. 

15—170 

Note  carefully  that  the  canonical  penance  inaugur- 
ated in  the  third  century  only,  and  eventually  abolished 
altogether,  was  nothing  (as  judiciously  remarked  by 
the  Jesuit  Father  Castelein  in  his  treatise  on  "Rigor- 
ism") but  a  temporary  "system  of  moral  police  adapted 
to  these  rude  ages",  and  consequently  could  form  no 
essential  part  of  either  sacramental  or  ecclesiastical 
restoration,  since  it  was  not  required  either  by  our 
Lord  in  the  case  of  Peter  or  subsequently  by  His  vicars 
in  many  other  historical  cases — for  instance,  in  the 
notorious  case  of  the  Donatist  priests  and  bishops 
who  had  apostatised  from  Catholic  unity. 


112  Peter's  Name; 

St.  Augustin  rightly  says  that  the  discipline  of  the 
Church  was  set  aside  in  their  favor.  Not.  that  the 
Church  ever  ceased  to  regard  Peter's  public  profession 
of  repentance  as  adequate  to  secure  absolution  from 
apostasy  itself  and  a  fortiori  from  schism;  but  be- 
cause, in  this  instance,  the  Church  mercifully  refrained 
from  requiring  even  such  a  public  profession  from 
Donatist  bishops  and  priests— and  because,  moreover, 
these  were  guilty  not  only  of  schism  but  of  heinous 
anti-social  crimes,  v.  g.  mutilation,  murder,  and  other 
revolting  outrages  against  Catholics.  Now  all  the 
Church  asked^them,  as  schismatics  and  criminals  be- 
sides, was,  in  sign  of  repentance,  to  embrace  the 
true  Faith  and  submit  to  Peter.  The  moment  they  did 
submit,  they  were  allowed  to  retain  their  rank  and  of- 
fice$;  a  course  eloquently  applauded  by  the  great  St. 
Augustin  as  being  in  every  way  worthy  of  the  suc- 
cessor$  of  Peter,  the  vicar  of  Jesus  Christ. — The  Pe- 
trine  test  alone  was  required  by  Leo  XIII  of  several 
priests  who  had  lapsed  into  the  old  Catholic  Schism, 
notably/rthe  renegade  bishop  Kupelian  (A.  D.)  1879), 
who,  after  deserting  the  Catholic  Church,  had  sacri- 
ligiously  received  episcopal  consecration  at  the  hands 
of  schismatic  bishops  and  placed  himself,  as  Patriarch, 
at  the  head  of  a  schismatic  faction  among  Catholic 
Armenians. 

He  was  restored  in  full  by  the  Holy  Father  after 
a  spiritual  retreat  of  a  few  days  in  a  convent  near 
Rome. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  113 

III.   St.  Augustin 's  restoration  and  promotion. 

But  far  more  significant  than  Bishop  Kupelian's 
is  the  restoration,  coupled  with  the  most  exalted  pro- 
motion, of  Augustin,  the  son  of  Monica,  or  rather 
the  son  of  her  tears. 

We  shall  condense  into  a  few  lines  the  history  of 
Augustin  as  told  by  himself  in  his  immortal  Con- 
fessions. We  give  the  reference  to  book  and  chapter 
to  enable  the  reader  to  verify  the  correctness  of  our 
statements. 

Augustin,  according  to  his  own  account,  was : 

(1)  An  apostate:   when  19  years  of  age,  he  apos- 
tatized from  the  Catholic  Faith  of  his  earliest  infancy : 
Conf.  1.  4,  c.  1;   l.^c.  n,  etc. 

(2)  Nine  years  a  Manichee,  i.  e.  a  notorious  rene- 
gade far  worse  than  a  Christian  turned  Mohammedan, 
for   Manicheism  was   far  more  degrading  than   Mo- 
hamedanism:  Conf.  v.  4.  c.  1 — . 

(3)  A  rabid  propagator  of  Manicheism  for  several 
years:  Conf.  1.  4.^.1,4:  $j  1.  6yc.  7. 

(4)  For  years  d  public  calumniator  of  the  Church 
and  a  mocker  of  her  sacraments   :  Conf.  1.  6,  c.  3,  4 ; 
1.  5,  c.  9. 

(5)  Twelve  years  a  notorious  renegade  or  public 
denier  of  God  Incarnate,  viz.,  from  the  I9th  to  the 
3ist  year  of  his  life:  Conf.  1.  7yc.  19. 

(6)  For  sixteen  years  the  notorious  <c slave  of  lust," 
as  he  calls  himself:    Conf.  1.  6,  c.  15. — viz.,  from  his 
i6th  to  his  32d  year :  Conf.  1.  2,  c.  3 ;  1.  8,  c.  5. 

(7)  For  sixteen  years  an  obstinate  rebel  to  the 
grace  of  God  and  to  the  tears  and  example  of  a  great 

PETER'S  NAME  8 


H4  Peter's  Name; 

heroine,  his  own  blessed  mother  St.  Monica,  who  for 
so  many  years  was  a  slow-martyr  to  maternal  love 
and  duty. 

Such  was  Augustin  when  he  returned  to  the  Cath- 
olic Faith.  No  sooner  had  the  Church  ascertained  the 
sincerity  of  his  repentance  than  she  folded  him  to  her 
maternal  bosom.  She  not  only  restored  him,  but 
promoted  him  (first)  to  the  priesthood  and  (second) 
to  the  episcopacy.  She  crowned  him  with  honor  as 
the  soul  of  her  Councils  (4th  Council  of  Carthage) 
and  as  the  wisest  counselor  of  the  Vicar  of  Jesus 
Christ. 

The  Church  followed  the  example  of  the  heavenly 
Father  in  his  treatment  of  the  Prodigal,  and  the  ex- 
ample of  Christ  in  His  treatment  of  Peter.  She  acted, 
as  the  Father  of  the  Prodigal  and  Christ  Himself 
did,  on  the  principle,  (we  repeat),  that  the  reparation 
should  be  as  public  as  the  offense — that  the  good  ex- 
ample of  the  convert  should  be  as  notorious  as  the 
scandal  given — that  the  lips  which  publicly  taught  er- 
ror should  still  more  publicly  proclaim  and  preach 
Catholic  truth — that  the  life  and  light  of  the  penitent 
should  not  be  throttled  and  extinguished  under  the 
bushel,  but  should  shine  far  and  wide  "to  all  that  are 
in  the  house,"  of  God:  (Matt.  5.  15,  etc.) 

Indeed  St.  Augustin  assures  us  that  our  Lord  Him- 
self, as  well  as  His  Church,  would  not  suffer  the  con- 
verted sinner  to  bury  himself  in  solitude,  but  urged 
him  to  devote  his  life  to  the  holy  ministry,  as  the  best 
way  to  repair  the  scandalous  past.  In  other  words, 
Christ  and  the  Church  and  natural  equity  and  reason 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  115 

unite  to  cry  out  that  a  public  offense  naturally  calls 
for  a  public  reparation. 

This  explains  why  the  Church  made  Augustin 
preside  over  a  Council  in  the  very  city  of  Carthage, 
which  he  had  formerly  scandalized  by  his  misdeeds. 

Was  the  Church  wrong?  Did  not  Christ  in  person 
promote  the  repentant  renegade  High  Priest  of  the 
New  Law,  Peter,  to  the  promised  office  at  the  head 
of  the  Apostolic  college  and  of  the  very  Church  he 
had  so  grievously  scandalized? 

Nay,  more,  even  under  the  old  Convenant  of  Fear, 
did  not  Jehovah  promote  to  the  High  Priesthood, 
after  the  first  sign  of  repentance,  the  recreant  High 
Priest-elect  of  the  old  Law,  Aaron,  and  set  him  over 
the  very  nation  he  had  so  basely  scandalized  by  openly 
sanctioning  its  apostasy  and  idolatrous  worship  of  the 
golden  calf? 

Who  but  an  out-and-out  Pharisee  will  hold  that 
the  restored  priest  or  bishop  authorized  to  minister 
before  God  Incarnate  present  on  our  allars — should 
be  deemed  unworthy  to  minister  before  the  people? 
Is  the  people  purer  than  God  Incarnate?  Such  populo- 
latry  is  but  another  base  form  of  idolatry,  and  goes 
hand  in  hand  with  the  degrading  worship  of  Mammon 
so  rampant  in  this  country. 


n6  Peter's  Name; 

IV.    St.  Augustin  persecuted  by  taunting  Pharisees. 

The  greatest  Doctor  of  the  Church,  St.  Augustin, 
had  for  a  life-time  to  suffer  the  persecutions  of  taunt-- 
ing pharisees.  Ah  those  taunting  pharisees,  do  they  not 
suggestively  put  one  in  mind  of  the  street-dogs  that 
heed  no  public  notice  to  commit  no  nuisance,  and 
respect  not  even  public  mttnuments.  Hence  it  is  that  that 
monumental  pillar  of  the  Church,  Augustin,  did  not 
escape  the  nameless  humiliation  and  affront.  Indeed, 
the  immaculate  whiteness  of  the  monument  and  its 
heaven-reaching  loftiness  were  but  additional  incent- 
ives to  pharisaic  defilers. 

In  his  third  sermon  on  the  36th  Psalm,  the  Saint 
replies  as  follows  to  his  pharisaic  taunters. 

"Thou  revilest  my  past  ills:  zvhat  great  things  dost 
thou  therein?  I  am  severer  against  my  ills  than  thou: 
what  thou  revilest  I  have  condemned.  Would  thou 
wouldst  imitate  me,  and  thy  error  also  become  past! 
Those  are  past  ills,  which  they  know  of  especially 
in  this  city  (Carthage).  For  here  we  lived  ill,  which 
I  confess....  Yet,  ivhatsoever  I  have  been,  in  the 
name  of  Christ  it  is  passed."  (Footnote,  page  223  of 
Conf.  St.  Augustine,  Revised  from  a  former  trans- 
lation, by  Dr.  Pusey,  London,  1887.) 

Note,  en  passant,  that  the  Church  allowed,  nay 
urged  Augustin  to  preach,  as  a  bishop,  to  the  very 
people  who  had  witnessed  his  former  scandalous  life. 
"Those  are  past  ills,"  he  says  in  his  sermon,  "which 
they  know  of  especially  in  this  city:  for  here  we 
lived  ill,  which  I  confess." 

He  was  obliged  to  preach  a  sermon  "lest  his  char- 
acter be  stained."  (Ibidem,  page  225,  note — ) 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  117 

It  is  plain  that  there  were  those,  in  the  days  of 
Augustin,  who  "would  fain  have  undervalued  his 
defences  of  the  Faith  on  account  of  his  sins"  (ibid.  p. 
223 ) .  They  ostracised  or  boycotted  him  and  his  books. 
They  stenched  his  name  and  his  writings;  a  process 
servilely  copied  by  our  modern  pharisees. 

The  cowardly  assailants  of  the  great  Doctor  were 
not,  however,  as  a  rule,  of  the  household  of  the  Faith, 
and  could  not  therefore  compare  in  depth  of  moral 
cowardice  and  perfidy  with  our  own  pharisees,  who 
can  boast  the  superior  and  privileged  dishonor  of  being 
traitors  in  the  very  camp  of  the  Church  militant. 

Little  did  the  mighty  moral  and  intellectual  Titan 
imagine  that  the  2Oth  century  would  see — not  heretics 
indeed — but  some  of  his  own  self-styled  spiritual  child- 
ren, indirectly  cast  up  the  past  to  him  by  imitating 
his  pharisaic  persecutors.  And,  among  those  self- 
styled  children,  not  Martin  the  Apostate  but  certain 
diminutive  orthodox  little  Martinettis,  noble  by  birth 
perhaps  but  ignoble  by  character  assuredly, — for,  alas, 
they  are  not  ashamed  to  unearth  and  rake  up  the  dung 
of  pharisaic  taunts,  once  thrown  up  into  the  face  of 
their  assumed  spiritual  Father, — in  order  to  fling  it 
anew  in  the  eyes  of  priests  long  since  restored  by  the 
Holy  See. 

With  what  indignation  would  the  grand  imperial 
soul  of  Augustine  disown  such  bastard  natures  and 
declare  them  in  no  way  connected  with  his  genuine 
spiritual  progeny! 


n8  Peter's  Name; 

V.   The  challenge  of  Christ  and  of  His  Chupeh  to  Pharisaism 

Could  our  Lord  more  forcibly  impress  upon  man- 
kind that  the  fundamental  function  of  His  Church  is 
to  restore  the  fallen — than  by  making  a  repentant 
public  sinner  the  living  foundation  of  His  Church? 

We  repeat  the  question  in  a  more  direct  form : 
Could  our  Lord  more  forcibly  impress  upon  mankind 
that  the  fundamental  function  of  His  Church  is  to 
restore  the  fallen — even  fallen  priests — than  by  making 
a  repentant  renegade  priest,  Peter,  the  living  Founda- 
tion of  His  Church? 

Aye,  we  must  put  the  question  in  a  still  more  point- 
ed form: 

Could  our  Lord  more  forcibly  impress  upon  man- 
kind that  the  fundamental  function  of  His  Church  is 
to  restore  the  fallen — even  fallen  bishops — than  by 
making  a  repentant  renegade  bishop,  Peter,  the  living 
Foundation  of  His  Church? 

Day  and  night  and  at  morn  and  at  noon  and  at 
-eventide,  does  the  multitudinous  voice  of  the  Church 
upon  whose  dominion  the  Sun  of  God  never  sets,  shout 
and  clamor  louder  than  a  million  thunders : 

Hear  ye,  O  Pharisees,  Christ  made  a  repentant 
public  sinner  the  living  Foundation  of  His  Church. 

Hear  ye,  O  Pharisees,  Christ  made  a  repentant 
renegade  priest  the  living  Foundation  of  His  Church. 

Hear  ye,  O  Pharisees,  Christ  made  a  repentant 
renegade  bishop  the  living  Foundation  of  His  Church 
— the  head- fountain  whence  the  ministry  of  salvation 
must  forever  flow  to  the  rest  of  the  human  race. 

Every  Catholic  bishop  is  episcopally  descended  from 
the  repentant  renegade  bishop  Simon  Peter 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          119 

"God  allowed"  Peter  "to  fall,  because  He  meant 
to  make  him  ruler  over  the  whole  world,  that,  re- 
membering his  own  fall,  he  might  forgive  those  who 
should  slip  in  the  future."  (S.  Chrys.  Horn.  73  in 
Joan.  5 :  ap.  Chapman's  The  Catholic  Claims,  chap.  5 ) . 

Thus  is  the  restoration  of  Peter,  Christ's  eternal 
challenge  to  the  Pharisaism  which  depraves  the  heart 
and  satanises  the  soul  of  man. 

Thus  is  the  restoration  as  well  as  the  promotion 
of  Augustin,  of  bishop  Kupelian,  and  of  so  many 
others,  the  everlasting  challenge  of  the  Church  to 
Pharisaism  and  all  its  foul  satanic  brood;  yea,  foul 
and  satanic,  for  God  Incarnate  Himself  tells  us  that 
Pharisaism  is  the  foul  offspring  of  Satan :  John  8.  44 ; 
Matt.  23.  27. 


I2O  Peter's  Name; 

The  Chureh  honors  the  penitent  priest  or  bishop  as  a  true  hero. 

She  looks  upon  his  persecutor,  the  taunting  Pharisee, 

as  a  human  insect  torturing  a  moral  giant 

The  Church  teaches  through  the  Vicar  of  Jesus 
Christ  that  the  bishop  or  priest  who  spontaneously  con- 
fesses his  Sin  and  retracts  his  error — not  to  get  thereby 
a  morsel  of  bread,  but  on  the  contrary,  at  the  cost  of 
great  sacrifices — is  verily  a  martyr  to  duty  and  per- 
forms an  act  of  exalted  heroism  in  the  estimation  of 
heaven  and  of  all  men  worthy  of  the  Christian  name. 

"Indeed,"  said  Leo  XIII  to  such  a  penitent,  "in- 
deed, to  humbly  acknowledge  one's  fault,  to  confess 
it,  to  detest  it  publicly  and  to  make  amende  honorable 
for  it,  is  assuredly  the  most  difficult  of  virtues;  and 
this,  according  to  the  infallible  judgment  of  divine 
Wisdom,  instead  of  humbling  and  degrading,  ennobles 
and  elevates  the  soul  of  him  who  has  been  able  to 
achieve  such  a  victory.  In  the  face  of  such  brilliant 
example,  all  remembrance  of  past  faults  is  wiped  out," 
and  consequently,  the  repentant  bishop  or  priest  "by 
this  act  gains,"  not  full  restoration  alone,  but  "glory 
before  God  and  man." 

Such  was  the  Allocution  addressed  by  Leo  XIII, 
on  the  1 8th  day  of  April  in  the  year  of  grace  1879,  to 
bishop  Kupelian  who,  as  we  have  said,  had  apostatised 
and  sacrilegiously  received  episcopal  consecration  from 
schismatic  bishops. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          121 

Why  does  the  Church  honor  the  restored  priest  as  a  true  hero 
and  lifelong  martyr  to  duty? 

Because,  unless  prepared  to  buy  his  way  back  into 
social  recognition  by  bribing  his  persecutors — for  Mam- 
mon covers  a  multitude  of  sins  in  pharisaic  circles,  and 
the  pharisee  is  quite  a  cheap  piece  of  merchandise — 
the  restored  priest  must  make  up  his  mind  either  to 
sink  into  despair  or  to  practice  daily  acts  of  heroism 
and  suffer  a  lingering  martyrdom  as  long  as  he  lives. 
For  alas  "oppression  troubleth  the  wise  and  shall  de- 
stroy the  strength  of  his  heart:"  Eccl.  7.  8. 

His  perseverance,  under  such  daily  provocations  to 
despair  and  such  daily  invitations  to  suicide,  can  only 
be  secured  by  a  miracle  of  the  grace  of  God.  And 
therefore  the  fact  alone  of  his  perseverance  makes  him 
worthy  of  being  revered  above  others,  as  a  heroic 
brother — a  myriad-martyred  brother. 

For,  apart  from  his  public  confession  and  heroic 
recantation  which,  according  to  Leo  XIII,  prove  in 
their  author  the  exercise  of  "the  most  difficult  of  vir- 
tues,"— apart  also,  t  sometimes,  from  the  sacrifice  of 
brilliant  positions, of  a  life  of  luxury  which  he  could 
have  easily  secured,  or  even  retained,  by  remaining  out 
of  the  Church, — he  must  stand  twenty^  thirty,  forty 
years  of  slow  death  at  the  hands  of  the  pharisee-host. 

He  must  be  the  daily  prey  of  the  clerical  blackmail- 
er, of  the  pious  blackmailer,  of  the  worldly  blackmailer 
— the  worst  of  whom  is  the  first,  whilst  the  second  is 
a  human  emetic. 

He  must  swim  across  life's  ocean  with  the  mill- 
stone of  the  pharisee-world  hanging  around  his  neck. 

He  must  wade  for  a  life-time  through  a  sea  of 


122  Peter's  Name; 

bitterness  so  deep  that  all  existing  pharisees,  even  if 
superposed  upon  one  another,  could  not  tower  above 
it  but  would  quickly  disappear  under  its  raging  billows. 

He  must  cleave  his  way  to  heaven  through  a  harder 
barrier  than  flint,  through  an  army  of  pharisees  who 
bar  the  passage.  He  must  prove  stronger  than  that 
army :  he  must  be,  morally,  a  ten-thousand-man  power 
in  one  single  person. 

And  alas,  and  alas,  and  forever  alas,  he  must  be, 
as  long  as  he  lives,  no  longer  a  Diocesan  priest  but 

a  Diocesan  cuspidor For,  the  restored  priest, 

deemed  good  enough  for  the  Bishop  of  bishops  in 
Rome,  is  not  good  enough  for  the  Pharisee! 

But  "the  soul  of  the  wounded  hath  cried  out,  and 
God  does  not  suffer  it  to  pass  unrevenged"  (Job 
24.  12). 

His  daily  prayer  therefore  is  the  sad  Scriptural 
invocation:  "I  beg,  O  Lord,  that  thou  loose  me  from 
the  bond  of  this  reproach,  or  else  take  me  away  from 
the  earth."  Tob.  3.  15. 

O  Pharisee,  what  art  thou  but  a  poor  miserable 
human  insect  before  the  superhuman  stature  of  thy 
restored  brother?  Bow  down  before  him  and  humbly 
say  to  him  in  the  words  of  Holy  Writ:  "thou  art  worth 
ten  thousand  of  us":  2  Kings  18.  3. 

The  pharisee  is  odious  to  our  Lord  because  he  is 
not  simply  a  renegade:  he  is  a  double  renegade, 
for  when  he  denies  that  the  Prodigal  is  his 
brother  he  thereby  denies  that  the  Father  of  the 
Prodigal  is  his  own  Father.  The  eternal  Justice  of 
God  has  thus  ruled  that  they  who  deny  the  Prodigal 
deny  the  Father  of  the  Prodigal  and  bear  the  stigma 
of  double-dyed  traitors  and  renegades. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          123 

"Despise  not  a  man  that  turneth  away  from  sin, 
nor  reproach  him  therewith:  remember  that  we  are 
all  worthy  of  reproach"  (Ecclus.  8.  6). 

O  Pharisee,  ever  prating  about  "fallen  priests", 
remember  that  even  a  fallen  dog  is  better  than  a 
standing  dunghill — which  every  pharisee  is.  And  re- 
member also  that  certain  creatures  can  never  fall,  for 
the  simple  reason  that  there  exists  nothing  lower  than 
their  own  natural  level. 

O  taunting  pharisee,  remember  there  is  something 
incomparably  viler  than  the  very  dung  of  the  past ;  and 
that  nameless  something  is  the  born  scavenger-soul 
that  delights  in  the  dung,  unearths  it,  feasts  upon  it, 
and  dwells  and  abides  in  it  as  its  native  microbe.  The 
very  dogs  loathe  to  unearth  one  another's  dung:  rise 
up  to  the  level  of  decent  animal  instinct. 

Whenever  you  crown  yourself  with  the  disgrace 
of  your  fallen  brother,  you  crown  yourself  with  a 
crown  of  dung,  and  you  confess  yourself  beneath  the 
refuse  of  the  past  since  you  use  it  as  your  crown  and 
you  put  your  brow  beneath  that  crown :  the  brow  is 
lower  than  the  crown  that  surmounts  it ! 

To  fall  is  human ;  but  to  trample  upon  the  fallen  is 
monstrous — monstrous  cowardice  and  satanic. 

O  taunting  pharisees,  impostors  and  fratricides 
alike,  who  tearfully  preach  the  parable  of  the  prodigal 
whilst  stealthily  and  slowly  murdering  your  own  re- 
stored brother.  In  vain  has  your  restored  brother  shed 
a  baptism  of  tears  and  wept  a  baptism  of  blood: 
Neither  tears  nor  blood  can  move  the  soul  of  the 
pharisee.  And  now,  behold,  the  blood  of  your  brother 
slowly  butchered  to  make  a  clerical  holiday. . . .  yes, 
the  blood  of  your  brother. . . . 


124  Peter's  Name; 

is  upon  your  hands,  and  upon  your  head  and  upon  your 
soul.  That  fraternal  blood  cries  vengeance  to  heaven 
and  will  haunt  the  judgment  seat  of  God.  Vengeance 
is  mine,  I  will  repay,  saith  the  Lord  (Rom.  12.  19). 

O  blessed  Peter,  uplifter  of  the  downtrodden  and 
restorer  of  the  fallen,  protect  thy  poor  helpless  priests 
from  those  "lording  it  over  the  clergy:"  i  Pet.  5.  3. — 
for  those  lords  "are  shut  up  in  their  own  fat  and  their 
mouth  speaketh  proudly."  (Ps.  16.  10.) — 

"It  is  enough;  now,  O  Lord,  take  away  my  life.  . . 
It  is  better  for  me  to  die  than  to  live .  . .  for  many  dogs 
have  encompassed  me."  (Tob.  3.  6;  3  Kings  19.  4;  Ps. 
21.  17.) 

Who  but  a  Pharisee  will  doom  to  the  life-long  de- 
gradation of  a  life-long  quarantine  a  fully  restored 
brother  holding  a  clean  bill  of  health  from  Peter's  own 
successor  in  person! 


Newman's  Rebuke  to  our  Pharisees. 

"It  is  our  duty  to  love  repentant  sinners  just  as 
if  they  had  not  sinned." — We  must  not  "treat  them 
in  any  degree  ( God  forbid ! )  as  if  their  approach  were 
a  pollution"  to  us. — "If  Christ  condescends  to  be  their 
meat  and  drink,  surely  the  holiest  of  men  need  not 
scruple  to  wash  their  feet." 

(Newman:  Saintliness  not  forfeited  by  Penitents, 
in  Sermons  on  Subjects  of  the  Day.) 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          125 

NOTE  XIX 


Comparative  view  of  the  threefold  power  vested  in  the  Church 
I.   The  power  of  Jurisdiction  and  the  power  of  Order. 

(a)  Their  general  nature: 

The  power  of  Order  gives  sacramental  power  over 
the  real  body  of  Christ  for  the  salvation  and  sanctifi- 
cation  of  souls. 

The  power  of  Jurisdiction  gives  authority  over  the 
mystical  body  of  Christ,  i.  e.,  power  to  rule  the  mem- 
bers and  subjects  of  the  Church. 

The  power  of  Order  is  purely  ministerial  or  in- 
strumental— i.  e.  it  can  only  transmit,  but  cannot  either 
produce  or  fashion,  that  which  constitutes  its  object, 
viz.,  the  real  Body  and  the  grace  of  the  sacraments  of 
Jesus  Christ.  God  alone  creates  grace  and  He  com- 
municates the  same  through  the  ministry  of  His  living 
instruments — the  episcopate  and  the  priesthood.  Priests 
and  bishops  are  only  the  channels,  the  dispensers — not 
the  creators  or  producers  or  fashioners — but  the  mere 
Dispensers  of  the  Mysteries  of  God :  i.  Cor.  4.  i ;  John 

i-33- 

%The  power  of  Jurisdiction  is  not  instrumental  or 
ministerial,  but  sovereign.  It  not  merely  transmits  but 
produces  and  makes  the  laws  and  precepts  which  con- 
stitute its  object:  Acts  15.  28,  29,  41;  20.  28  etc. 

In  short,  the  power  of  Order  is  the  mere  trans- 
mitter of  its  object,  viz.,  the  real  Body  and  the  grace 
of  Jesus  Christ — whilst  the  power  of  Jurisdiction  is 
either  the  producer  or  the  fashioner  and  framer  of  its 


126  Peter's  Name; 

object,  viz.,  its  own  orders,  commands,  precepts,  legis- 
lation and  ruling  control  over  the  mystic  body  of  Christ, 
the  Catholic  Church. 

Chief  scriptural  references:  Matt.  18.17;  28.20; 
Luke  10.  16;  John  10.  2 — 5  ;  Acts  14,  22 ;  15,  i$,  29,  41 ; 
20.  28;  i  Cor.  5.  3— 5;  7.  6,  10,  12;  n.  2,  34;  2  Cor.  13. 
10;  Eph.  4.  ii ;  i  Tim.  i.  19;  3.2;  4.  14;  5.  19,22;  2 
Tim.  1.6;  2.  17,  18;  Tit  i.  5;  i  Pet.  5.2,4,  etc. 

(b)  Their  respective  hierarchy : 

Three  degrees  of  the  power  of  Order  are  of  Divine 
institution,  viz.,  the  episcopacy,  the  priesthood  and  the 
diaconate. 

Three  degrees  of  the  power  of  Jurisdiction  are  of 
Divine  institution,  viz.,  the  papacy,  the  episcopacy  and 
the  priesthood. 

(c)  Their  genesis  and  form,  or  frame : 

Both  are  of  God.  But  whilst  the  power  of  Juris- 
diction comes  directly  from  the  visible  head  of  the 
Church — the  power  of  Order  springs  directly  and  im- 
mediately from  Christ  in  the  sacrament  of  the  same 
name. 

The  first  (jurisdiction)  is  mediately  of  God  and 
immediately  of  His  Vicar;  the  second  (order)  is  in- 
directly or  instrumentally  of  the  Church  and  immedi- 
ately of  God  who  alone  can  create  in  the  soul  the,  in- 
delible character  of  His  Divine  priesthood  and  the 
Deific  gift  of  divine  Order. 

The  power  of  jurisdiction  is  not,  so  to  say,  ready- 
made  or  specifically  determined  in  advance  by  the  will 
of  God.  It  is  broadly  outlined,  not  mapped  out,  by 
our  blessed  Lord:  Matt.  18.  18,  etc.  Its  outlines  are 
to  be  filled  out  by  Peter  or  His  successor,  the  pope,  who 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          127 

is  the  Christ-appointed  disposer,  and  grantor  of  the 
power  (Matt.  16.  18.  19.)  in  such  proportions  as  he 
sees  fit. 

The  power  of  Order  is,  so  to  speak,  ready-made, 
i.  e.  specifically  determined  in  advance  by  the  will  and 
ordinance  of  Christ — as  to  its  matter,  form,  subject, 
minister  and  scope.  God  Himself,  not  the  Church,  is 
its  framer  and  immediate  grantor  in  the  sacrament  of 
which  the  bishop  is  the  ministerial  instrument  only. 

In  brief,  Peter  has  dominion  and  authority  over  the 
power  of  jurisdiction:  he  may  abridge  or  recall  it,  or 
divide  and  subdivide  its  field,  as  he  deems  best  for  the 
welfare  of  the  Church. 

But  he  has  no  such  dominion  or  discretionary  auth- 
ority over  the  power  of  Order,  which  he  can  only  use 
in  its  divinely  set  form  and  fixed  measure:  he  is  not 
the  disposer  and  grantor  thereof,  but  its  mere  instru- 
ment of  transmission. 

(d)  Their  mode  of  transmission: 

The  power  of  jurisdiction  is  transmitted  by  appoint- 
ment or  delegation. 

The  power  of  Order  cannot  be  delegated,  but  can 
only  be  transmitted  sacramentally,  through  the  sacra- 
ment of  ordination. 

(e)  Their  separability: 

The  power  of  jurisdiction  may  exist  without  the 
power  of  Order,  and  vice  versa.  The  first  may  be  del- 
egated by  the  proper  authority,  to  one  who  is  not  in 
sacred  Orders,  to  a  simple  cleric  or  even  to  a  layman — 
whilst  the  power  of  Order  may  be  conferred  on  one 
from  whom  jurisdiction  is  withheld  partly  or  alto- 
gether. 


128  Peter's  Name; 

There  is  but  one  sacrament  the  validity  of  which 
depends  on  the  union  of  the  two  powers  of  Order  and 
Jurisdiction  viz.,  the  sacred  tribunal  of  Penance,  which 
is  essentially  judicial  in  its  very  nature.  Now,  judg- 
ment can  only  be  passed  on  one  legally  subject  or  amen- 
able to  the  juage,  i.  e.  upon  one  over  whom  the  judgt 
holds  legal  jurisdiction.  Impossible,  therefore,  to  rend- 
er judgment  in  the  sacrament  of  Penance  without  ade- 
quate jurisdiction  over  the  penitent. 

(f)  Their  respective  irrevocable  or  revocable  char- 
acter : 

The  power  of  Order  in  the  Church  is  as  irrevocable 
as  the  character  imprinted  by  the  sacrament:  for  in- 
stance, a  priest  or  a  bishop  can  never  lose  the  power 
of  consecrating  validly  the  matter  of  the  Sacrifice  of  the 
New  Law. 

But  the  power  of  Jurisdiction  is  revocable  at  the 
discretion  of  the  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ:  Matt.  16. 
18,  19. 

(g)  Their  respective  apportionment: 

The  power  of  Order  can  only  be  conferred  in  equal 
and  immutable  measure  on  each  priest  and  bishop: 
it  is  fixed,  abiding,  unchangeable. 

The  power  of  Jurisdiction  is  conferred  in  varying 
and  unequal  measure  upon  clerics  of  the  very  same 
degree  of  Order,  according  to  the  needs  of  the  Church. 
Nay,  it  may  vary,  be  increased  or  diminished  in  the 
same  individual  and  though  the  latter  remains  in  the 
same  rank  of  Orders.  For  instance,  a  priest,  whilst 
remaining  simply  a  priest,  may  be  promoted  in  the 
jurisdictional  scale  and  exercise  quasi-episcopal  juris- 
diction as  administrator  of  a  diocese — or  may  be  grant- 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          129 

ed  a  far  greater  amount  of  jurisdiction  than  any  bishop, 
v.  g.  as  Papal  legate. 

(h)  Their  immediate  effect: 

The  immediate  effect  of  the  power  of  Order — be- 
sides the  sacerdotal  character  it  imprints — is  the  sanc- 
tification  of  the  Church  ex  opere  operato.  It  produces 
the  world-wide  cohesive  force  of  a  world-wide  unity  of 
divine  life  and  love  throughout  the  universal  Church. 

The  immediate  effect  of  the  power  of  Jurisdiction 
is  to  produce  the  world-wide  cohesive  force  of  a  world- 
wide unity  of  action  throughout  the  universal  Church : 
its  ultimate  effect  is  our  sanctification  ex  opere  oper- 
ands. 


The  main  points  of  difference  between  Order  and 
Jurisdiction  are  thus  admirably  recapitulated  by  Mon- 
signor  Capel: 

"It  will  be  remarked  that  in  appointing  these  pas- 
tors there  was  (i)  'imposition  of  hands'  and  (2)  'being 

sent.'  (Heb.  13.  7,  17;  Acts  ch.  13  and  6.  6 )    The 

'imposition  of  hands'  is  the  sacrament  of  Orders,  and, 
in  common  with  the  other  sacraments,  its  effect  is 
conferred  direct  by  God.  .  .  .  But  the  'Commission' 
or  'being  sent'  is  derived  direct  from  the  Apostles. 
It  specifies  where,  how,  and  when  the  divine 
authority  is  to  be  exercised  by  the  individual  pastor . . . 
These  two  powers  are  distinguished  as  the  power  of 
Order  and  the  power  of  Jurisdiction.  Both  are  of 
God:  the  one  comes  direct  through  the  sacrament  of 
Order;  the  other  indirectly  from  God  through  the 
Church  by  appointment. 

PETER'S  NAME  Q 


130  Peter 's  Name; 

In  the  early  Church  they  were  often  conferred 
simultaneously :  still  they  were  looked  upon  as  distinct 
operations.  The  power  of  jurisdiction  is  not  necessari- 
ly attached  to  Orders ;  though  for  some  acts,  such 
as  absolution  from  sin,  both  are  necessary.  The  Apost- 
les and  the  Seventy,  who  were  sent  out  at  first  two 
and  two,  had  jurisdiction  but  not  Orders.  A  man  may 
be  a  bishop  and  yet  not  be  a  bishop  of  a  diocese.  On 
the  other  hand,  a  duly  and  canonically  confirmed 
bishop-elect  possesses  jurisdiction  without  the  episcopal 
power  to  confirm  and  to  ordain.  A  deposed  bishop 
is  still  possessed  of  his  episcopal  power,  but  he  is 
deprived  of  jurisdiction  or  cure  of  souls.  His  ordina- 
tions would  be  valid ;  his  absolutions  null  and  void. 

The  power  of  Order  gives  capacity;  the  powei 
of  jurisdiction  permits  the  use  of  authority.  The 
distinction  between  'can'  and  'may,'  the  former  ex- 
pressing inherent,  the  latter  dependent  power — affords 
a  good  illustration  of  the  subject.  The  dispenser  of  the 
power  of  Order  is  but  an  instrument,  the  grantor  of 
the  power  of  jurisdiction  exercises  authority  and  dom- 
inion. The  first,  coming  directly  from  Christ,  is  abid- 
ing, unchangeable,  and  is  conferred  in  equal  measure 
on  each  priest  or  bishop.  The  second,  not  coming 
immediately  but  through  the  Church  from  Christ  to 
individuals,  is  conferred  in  varying  proportions  as 
may  be  deemed  expedient  for  the  good  of  souls." 
("Catholic,"  ist  ed.,  p.  23.) 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          131 

II.   The  power  of  Jurisdiction  and  the  magisterial  or  teaching 

power 

(a)  Their  respective  extent: 

The  jurisdiction  of  the  Church  extends  to  her  own 
members  and  subjects  only. 

Her  magisterial  infallible  prerogative  embraces  all 
mankind. 

(b)  Their  respective  functions: 

The  magisterial  power  is  the  infallible  eye  that 
descries  the  truths  of  Revelation.  Its  function  is  to 
make  known,  expound  and  define  the  Divine  law  and 
doctrine. 

The  jurisdictional  power  is  the  right  arm  of  the 
Church.  Its  function  is  to  enforce,  defend,  and  vindi- 
cate her  magisterial  decisions  by  means  of  laws,  pre- 
cepts, and  penalties. 

(c)  The  different  character  of  the  obligation  they 
generate : 

(First)  The  magisterial  power  demands  of  all, 
per  se,  the  obedience  of  divine  faith  due  to  God  the 
Revealer. 

The  Jurisdictional  power  demands,  of  its  subjects 
only,  the  obedience  of  ecclesiastical  faith  in  the  pre- 
cepts of  the  Church. 

The  first  requires  the  adoring  obedience  due  to  God 
alone ;  the  second,  the  reverent  obedience  due  to  God's 
representative,  the  Catholic  Church. 

In  the  ex-cathedra  pronouncements  of  the  magis- 
terial power,  the  motive  of  obedience  held  out  by  the 
Church  is  that  God  himself  was  in  the  past  the  direct 
and  immediate  Revealer  of  the  truth  of  which  she 
is  the  simple  promulgator — and  that,  by  consequence, 


132  Peter's  Name; 

a  denial  or  non-acceptance  of  these  truths  is  a  direct 
and  immediate  disobedience,  nay  a  giving  the  lie,  to 
God  the  Revealer  in  person. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Church  tells  us  that  God 
is  not  the  direct  author  or  revealer  of  her  own  ec- 
clesiastical laws — which  consequently  cannot  command 
the  adoring  abedience  we  owe  to  the  word  of  the 
Revealer.  A  violation  of  the  laws  of  the  Church 
connotes  direct  disobedience  to  the  enactor  of  those 
laws,  viz.,  the  Church  herself — but  constitutes  simply 
an  act  of  indirect  disobedience  to  God  who  founded 
the  Church  indeed,  but  is  not,  after  all,  the  immediate 
framer  of  her  own  laws,  precepts,  and  ordinances. 

(Second)  When  the  Church,  in  her  magisterial 
capacity,  promulgates  a  truth  as  part  of  the  deposit 
of  Revelation,  the  consequent  obligation  of  divine 
faith  and  adoring  obedience  is,  per  se,  universal  and  as 
irrevocable,  as  immutable,  as  the  truth  she  promul- 
gates. But  when  the  Church,  in  her  ruling,  or  governing 
capacity,  enacts  a  law  or  issues  a  command — the  con- 
sequent obligation  of  absolute  obedience  is  not  uni- 
versal and  is,  moreover,  revocable  and  mutable  at 
her  own  wise  discretion.  It  is  not  universal,  since  it 
goes  no  further  than  the  law  itself  which  cannot 
bind  the  unbaptized  and  which  frequently  concerns 
only  a  portion  of  the  Church — v.  g.  the  clergy,  or  the 
religious  orders,  or  the  laity.  It  is  revocable  at  will, 
and  not  immutable,  since  the  Church  is  free  to  ab- 
rogate, suspend,  or  modify  her  own  laws. 

(d)  The  immediate  framers  of  their  respective 
object-matter : 

God  is  the  direct  author  of  revelation,  which  forms 
the  object-matter  of  the  magisterial  power. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          133 

The  Church  herself  is  the  direct  author  of  ec- 
clesiastical law,  which  forms  the  object-matter  of  the 
jurisdictional  power. 

(e)  Their  immediate  effects : 

The  immediate  effect  of  the  magisterial  power  is 
to  produce  the  world-wide  cohesive  force  of  a  world- 
wide unity  of  faith  throughout  the  universal  Church. 

The  immediate  effect  of  the  jurisdictional  power 
(as  mentioned  above)  is  to  produce  the  world-wide 
cohesive  force  of  a  world-wide  unity  of  action  through- 
out the  universal  Church.  (Cf.  Franzelin's  posthum. 
thesis  on  the  Church.) 


134  Peter's  Name; 

NOTE  XX 


Did  all  the  Apostles  receive  their  jurisdiction  from  Christ 
exclusively? 

Peter  alone  did.  The  other  Apostles  received 
jurisdiction  both  from  its  creator,  Jesus  Christ,  and 
from  its  original  Apostolic  possessor  (Peter)  as  from 
a  visible  joint-source  of  authority.  That  is  to  say, 
both  Christ  and  Peter  —  the  first,  by  His  own  inde- 
pendent sovereign  will  and  with  the  full  '  knowledge 
of  the  other  apostles  (Luke  24.  42,  etc)  ;  the  second, 
by  his  own  responsive  and  concurrent  will  —  both  Christ 
and  Peter  caused  the  plenitude  of  authority  till  then 
locked  up  in  the  Apostolic  head  (Matt.  16.  18,  19; 
John  21.  15  —  17),  to  fill  up  the  entire  Apostolic 
body:  Matt.  18.  18. 

Even  as  the  Father  imparted  His  authority  to 
Christ  (John  20.  21,  etc.),  and  then  jointly  with  Christ 
(John  21.  15,  17)  imparted  the  same  to  Peter  but  in 
subordination  to  Christ  —  so  did  the  latter  first  im- 
part ^  to  the  other  Apostles,  but  in  subordination  to 
Peter:  Matt.  28.  18. 

The  profoundly  significant  fact  that  authority  was 
first  infused  into  the  Apostolic  head  alone,  and  thence 
subsequently  diffused  into  the  whole  body,  most  forcib- 
ly intimates  that  such  a  diffusion  of  authority  was 
brought  about  by  the  will  of  Christ  and  the  concur- 
rent  will  of  its  Apostolic  possessor.  For,  of  a  cer- 
tainty, when  our  Lord  made  Peter,  under  and  with 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  135 

Him,  the  foundation  and  visible  head  of  the  Church 
(Matt.  1 6.  18;  John  21.  17),  and  at  the  same  time 
deposited  in  him  alone  and  separately  the  fulness  of 
Apostolic  authority  (ibid.) — He  thereby  declared  him 
the  material  or  passive  source,  at  least,  of  said  author- 
ity— since  the  head  is  naturally  the  source  whence  the 
body  derives  light,  guidance,  and  governance. 

Now,  God  did  not  leave  His  grand  fwork 
unfinished  and  half  done :  therefore  does  He,  in  Matt. 
1 8.  1 8,  distinctly  forewarn  the  Apostfes  that  the  then 
material  source-elect  of  authority  (Peter)  must  be 
prepared  to  become,  later  on,  the  active  and  formal 
source  thereof.  How?  By  filling  up  the  whole  body 
therewith,  by  a  positive  act  of  mis  own  will,  under 
the  express  will  of  Christ,  as  recorded  in  Matt.  28.  18. 

Nay,  more,  the  very  promise  of  Christ  to  all  His 
Apostles,  in  Matt.  18.  18.  that  the  authority  first 
deposited  in  Peter  (Matt.  16.  18;  John  21.  17)  would 
eventually  be  trans fered  to  the  rest  of  the  body — 
was  tantamount  to  a  twofold  notice  served  long  in 
advance  upon  Peter  and  upon  his  fellow-apostles. 
To  Peter  it  clearly  signified:  "Be  prepared,  O  thou 
my  chosen  Apostolic  head,  to  co-operate  with  Me  by 
a  positive  act  of  thy  will  in  the  distribution  of  authoi- 
ity  from  the  Apostolic  head  and  actual  possessor  there- 
of, thyself,  to  the  other  Apostolic  members." 

To  the  Apostles  it  obviously  meant:  "Be  pre- 
pared, O  ye  my  Apostles,  to  receive  authority,  now 
wholly  resident  in  Peter,  from  the  concordant  will  of 
Peter  and  Mine  own/' 

Our  Lord  does  not  make,  in  Matt.  18.  18,  the  absurd 
promise  that  the  Apostolic  members  shall  share  the 


136  Peter's  Name; 

inalienable  headship  of  Peter — for,  then,  their  body 
would  only  be  a  many-headed,  a  twelve-headed  mons- 
trosity. What  Christ  does  promise  to  the  Apostles 
collectively  taken,  i.  e.  to  the  whole  Apostolic  body 
as  constituted  by  Himself  under  the  headship  of  Peter, 
(Matt.  16.  19;  John  21.  17  ,etc.)  is  this:  Full  auth- 
ority shall  naturally  descend  from  the  head  to  the 
rest  of  the  body  (Matt.  18.  18),  but  always  (bear  in 
mind)  under  the  supremacy  of  the  Christ-appointed 
head,  Peter:  Matt.  16.  18;  John  21.  17. 

Thus  the  Apostles  will  derive  their  authority  from 
Christ  and  Peter  jointly,  and  will  exercise  it  as  faithful 
members,  and  consequently  in  perfect  subordination 
to  the  Apostolic  head  appointed  by  our  Lord,  (ibid.) 

The  profound  truth  to  be  insisted  upon  is  that 
thV  above-mentioned  circulation  of  authority  from  the 
Apostolic  'head  to  *the  Apostolic  members  will  be 
brought  about  by  the  will  of  Christ  and  the  obediently 
concurrent  will  of  the  Apostolic  head,  wherein  the 
aforesaid  authority  was  first  deposited  and  perma- 
nently resides. 


The  rash  assertion  that  the  other  eleven  Apostles, 
besides  Peter,  received  jurisdiction  from  Christ  ex- 
clusively and  not  from  Peter  simultaneously,  would, 
if  true,  create  the  reasonable  presumption  that  the 
successors  of  the  Apostles,  the  bishops,  do  still  re- 
ceive it  in  the  same  way,  i.  e.  as  the  pope  does,  im- 
mediately from  our  Lord  and  from  no  one  else.  The 
proposition,  as  it  stands,  is  but  a  half-truth  and  fatally 
mischievous  as  well  as  misleading.  The  whole  truth 
is  that  eleven  of  the  Apostles  received  jurisdiction 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          137 

from  Christ  and  Peter  jointly  and  simultaneously — 
Peter  alone  remaining  the  one  visible  source  of  auth- 
ority after  the  ascension  of  our  Lord. 

Such  is  the  teaching  of  the  Holy  Fathers :  For  in- 
stance, St.  Optatus  writes  without  hesitating  that  the 
other  Apostles  received  the  Keys  from  Peter :  "Beatus 
Petrus  et  praeferri  omnibus  Apostolis  meruit  et  claves 
regni  coelorum  communicandas  caeteris  solus  accepit." 
(De  schism.  Donat.  centra  Parmen.,  1.7,  c.  3.  et  1.2, 
c.  2.) 

Pope  St.  Leo  the  Great  is  as  emphatic  as  St.  Opta- 
tus, and  says:  "If  Christ  willed  that  the  other  rulers 
should  enjoy  aught  together  with  him"  (Peter)  "yet 
never  did  He  gave  save  through  him  what  He  denied 
not  to  others."  (Serm.  4.) 

It  was  meet^in^fiao,  that^ 
diction  from  Christ  in  person,  the  better  to  remind  us 
all  that  Christ  is  the  meritorious  efficient  cause,  not 
less  than  the  original  source,  of  authority  in  the  Church. 

It  was  equally  meet  that  the  subordinate  eleven 
Apostles  should  receive  jurisdiction  from  Peter  jointly 
with  Christ — to  remind  the  Apostles  themselves  that 
Christ's  Vicar  was  then,  yes,  even  then,  the  visible 
source  of  Apostolic  authority. 

It  was  meet,  in  fine,  that,  after  His  ascension,  Christ 
should  safeguard  the  prestige  and  strengthen  the  hands 
of  His  Vicar  by  leaving  the  latter  behind  Him  as  the 
one  visible  source  of  jurisdiction  in  the  Church 
militant. 


138  Peter's  Name; 

NOTE  XXI 

Comparative  powers  of  Peter  and  of  the  other  Apostles 

As  to  the  power  of  Order,  the  other  Apostles  were 
the  peers  of  Peter. 

As  regards  the  power  of  jurisdiction  and  the  ma- 
gisterial power,  they  were  his  subordinates. 

(a)  Peter  received  his  authority,  as  we  have  seen, 
from  Christ  exclusively. 

The  other  Apostles  received  theirs  both  from 
Christ  and  Peter  jointly  and  simultaneously. 

(b)  The  authority  of  the  other  apostles  was  lim- 
ited to  the  Christians  outside  the  Apostolic  college  it- 
self, over  which  they  had  no  jurisdiction. 

Peter's  authority  alone  extended  over  the  Apostles, 
over  each  of  them  individually  and  all  of  them  col- 
lectively, and  over  the  whole  Church.  He  could  give 
precepts  and  commands  to  the  Apostles,  dispense  from 
their  laws,  repeal  these  and  replace  them  by  laws  of 
his  own. 

(c)  The  authority  of  the  apostles  was  conditioned 
on  their  adhesion  and  subordination  to  Peter. 

The  authority  of  Peter  was  unconditional  and 
supreme. 

(d)  The  other   apostles  were  bound,  under  pain 
of  schism,  to  affiliate  all   the   Christian  communities 
they  established,  with  the  person  of  Peter:  else,  they 
had  failed  to  build  on  the  visible  foundation  laid  by 
the  Lord,  viz.,  the  Rock,  Peter. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          139 

Peter  was  under  no  such  obligation  toward  his  fel- 
low-Apostles:  they  must  build  on  the  Rock,  not  the 
Rock  on  them. 

(e)  The  personal  infallibility  with  which  each  of 
the  other  Apostles  was  endowed  was  a  temporary  and 
exceptional  privilege  intended  to  meet  temporary  and 
exceptional    exigencies, — and,    above    all,    was    condi- 
tioned on  their  adhesion  to  the  Rock-confirmer  of  the 
Faith :  Luke  22.  32. 

Peter's  infallibility  belonged  to  his  office  as  the 
Confirmer  of  the  Faith  (ibid.),  and  must  needs  be  as 
permanent  as  the  Petrine  or  Papal  office  itself.  Note 
that  whilst,  on  the  one  hand,  the  subordinate  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  Apostles  and  their  individual  infallibility 
were  conditioned  on  their  adhesion  to  the  Vicar  of 
Jesus  Christ, — they  had,  on  the  other  hand,  been  con- 
firmed in  grace  and  received  a  Divine  promise  of  perse- 
verance in  their  loyalty  to  Peter.  Such  is  the  teaching 
of  Divine  Tradition. 

(f)  Peter  alone — singly,  separately,  independently 
— received  a  unique  and  universal  commission  from  the 
Founder  of  the  Church:  Matt.  16.  18,  19;  Luke  22.  31, 
32;  John  21.  15,  1 6.  17. 

The  other  Apostles  received  collectively  and  cor- 
porately,  i.  e.  as  already  constituted  by  our  Lord  under 
Peter — -a  general  and  collective  commission  only :  Matt. 
18.  18 ;  Mark  16.  15  ;  John  20.  21. 

Their  individual  jurisdiction  was  thus  plainly  de- 
clared by  the  Lord  Himself  to  be,  firstly,  subordinate 
to  their  visible  head,  Peter;  and,  secondly,  restricted 
or  limited — since  it  was  not  the  plenitude  or  universa- 


140  Peter's  Name; 

lity,  but  a  mere  component  part,  of  their  corporate 
authority  under  Peter.  For,  a  power  divided  among 
several  is  necessarily  bounded,  in  each  participator, 
by  the  boundaries  of  undue  interference  with,  or  en- 
croachment upon,  one  another. 

It  is  quite  otherwise  with  powers  conferred  sep- 
arately upon  one  single  individual.  Here,  for  instance, 
is  a  fact  of  colossal  magnitude  and  significance:  all 
the  powers  conferred  on  the  Apostles  corporately 
(Matt.  18.  18;  28.  18)  ;  had  been  previously  conferred 
on  Peter  singly  and  individually  (Matt.  16.  18,  19;  John 
21.  17).  But  the  converse  does  not  hold,  since  the 
four  great  prerogatives  granted  to  Peter  were  never 
extended  to  the  other  Apostles:  Peter  alone  was  the 
Rock  (Matt.  16.  18;  John  1.42),  the  Keyward  (Matt. 
16.  19),  the  Confirmer  of  the  Faithful  (Luke  22.  32), 
the  universal  Shepherd.  (John  21.  17.) 

The  words  of  Christ,  "Go  ye  into  the  world"  (Mark 
1 6.  15)  were  addressed  to  all  the  Apostles  collectively, 
and  corporately  under  their  God-appointed  head,  Peter ; 
they  did  not  and  could  not  apply  to  each  of  them  in- 
dividually. Excepting  the  universal  Shepherd's,  every 
Apostle's  sphere  of  action  was  necessarily  restricted 
by  that  of  every  other  brother  Apostle.  In  point  of 
fact,  tradition,  history,  and  ancient  liturgies  of  the 
East  and  of  the  West  attest  that — before  their  final 
dispersion — the  Apostles  districted  out  and  apportioned 
the  world  among  themselves  under  the  headship  of  him 
whom  Christ  had  set  over  them  as  the  universal  Pastor 
(John  21.  17).  Each  therefore  of  the  other  Apostles 
had  a  Portion  of  the  earth  allotted  to  his  share — 
but  Peter  had  previously  received  from  Christ  in 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          141 

person  the  whole  world  as  his  diocese  or  field  of  opera- 
tion: John  21.  17. 

Neither  Holy  Writ  nor  tradition  breathes  one  word 
in  favor  of  the  untenable  opinion  that  every  Apostle 
enjoyed  universal  jurisdiction :  an  opinion  which  cannot 
stand  the  test  of  deep  thought  and  thorough  research. 
To  elucidate: 

The  jurisdiction  of  Peter  was  universal,  ordinary, 
i.  e.  inherent  in  his  office. 

The  jurisdiction  of  the  other  Apostles  was  limited 
and  twofold.  It  was  ordinary  and  extraordinary,  or 
delegated.  Their  ordinary  jurisdiction  did  not  extend 
beyond  the  special  field  allotted  to  each  when,  before 
parting  and  taking  leave  of  one  another,  they  (as  we 
have  said)  divided  the  world  into  districts  under  and 
by  the  authority  of  the  visible  head,  Peter — as  attested 
by  St.  Leo  the  Great,  in  his  first  sermon  on  SS.  Peter 
and  Paul.  (Rom.  Brev.,  i8th  of  January.) 

Their  extraordinary  jurisdiction  extended  beyond 
their  allotted  sphere,  but  only  so  far  and  as  often  as 
required  by  the  good  of  Religion.  Now,  the  interest 
of  religion  did  certainly  not  require  that  the  jurisdiction 
of  every  one  of  the  twelve  Apostles  should  comprise 
all  the  clergy  and  all  the  faithful  diffused  over  the  face 
of  the  globe.  In  other  words,  the  interest  of  religion 
did  not  require  the  existence  of  twelve  Peters,  but  of 
one  and  one  only,  to  wit:  the  one  Peter  named  after 
Himself,  by  our  divine  Saviour:  the  one  universal  Shep- 
herd, the  one  visible  center  and  the  one  visible  bond  of 
the  ^>ne  yicib^  r^nt^  a^d  thf  nt^  yir.iKIp  bnn^  nf 
unity.  It  was  enough  that  each  of  the  other  Apostles 
should  have,  not  universal  dominion,  but  a  limited 


142  Peter's  Name; 

though  extraordinary  jurisdiction  extending  as  far  as 
circumstances  demanded,  and  no  farther. 

We  repeat,  one  Rock  was  enough,  and  God  did  not 
create  twelve  Peters:  infinite  Wisdom  indulges  not  in 
superfluous  creations.  To  illustrate:  St.  Paul's  or- 
dinary jurisdiction  covered  the  immense  regions  evan- 
gelised by  himself.  Beyond  that  line,  he  possessed 
delegated  jurisdiction  only,  in  places  evangelised  by  the 
other  Apostles  and  subsequently  visited  by  himself — 
v.  g.  in  the  Church  of  Rome,  founded  by  Peter.  But 
his  jurisdiction,  either  ordinary  or  delegated,  was  not 
universal.  It  did  not  reach,  for  instance,  the  province 
of  the  Apostle  Thomas  in  India,  nor  that  of  the 
Apostle  Simon  the  Cananean  in  Persia  etc. 

As  already  stated,  the  good  of  souls  called  not  for 
a  Church-wide  extension  of  authority  in  every  Apostle, 
but  for  an  occasional  extension,  limited  by  the  require- 
ments of  arising  emergencies. 

Now,  who  could  delegate  and  grant  such  extraor- 
dinary jurisdiction  to  each  of  the  Apostles  before  their 
voluntary  dispersion  to  the  four  parts  of  the  earth? 
Who,  but  he  to  whom  singly  and  separately  Christ  had 
given  the  plenitude  of  authority  by  making  him  the 
foundation  of  the  Apostolic  college,  the  Confirmer  of 
the  Apostolic  body,  the  supreme  Shepherd  of  all  the 
Apostles  as  well  as  of  the  rest  of  the  universal  Church : 
Matt.  16.  18,  19;  Luke  22.  32;  John  21.  17. 

(g)  The  extraordinary  jurisdiction  of  each  Apostle, 
being  not  only  limited  and  temporary  but  simply  dele- 
gated, was  therefore  untransmissible  of  its  nature,  or 
per  se.  It  died  a  natural  death  and  ceased  altogether 
with  the  temporary  necessities  that  gave  rise  to  it,  i.  e. 
with  the  last  of  the  Apostles. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  143 

Peter's  jurisdiction,  being  ordinary  or  inherent  in 
his  office,  is  and  must  needs  be  as  transmissible  as  the 
office  to  which  it  essentially  belongs. 

The  theory  that  every  Apostle  had  universal  juris- 
diction is  indefensible.  Even  the  partisans  of  the 
theory  acknowledge  with  all  Catholic  theologians  that, 
excepting  Peter  alone,  none  of  the  Apostles  had,  either 
collectively  or  individually,  any  authority  whatever 
over  one  another,  and  much  less  over  the  entire  Apos- 
tolic body.  Such  an  acknowledgment  is  a  plain  con- 
fession that  the  jurisdiction  of  the  other  Apostles  was 
not  universal,  since  it  did'  not  include  the  noblest  part 
of  the  Church — her  Apostolic  princes  and  rulers — who, 
by  Divine  appointment,  recognised  Peter  alone  as  their 
visible  superior  and  sovereign  ruler. 


Why  does  the  successor  of  Pater  receive  the  plenitude  of  juris- 
diction immediately  from  Jesus  Christ  Himself? 

Because  neither  the  bishops  nor  the  priests — col- 
lectively or  individually — nor  the  whole  Church,  ever 
received  the  pontifical  power  granted  to  Peter  and  his 
successors  exclusively  (ibid.). — They  cannot  therefore 
communicate  that  which  they  have  not,  i.  e.  the  pon- 
tifical sovereignty;  nor  can  any  one  else  on  earth. 
There  remains  but  one  alternative:  either  Peter  never 
had  any  successor,  the  pledge  of  Christ  to  the  contrary 
notwithstanding  (Matt.  16.  18  etc.) — or  the  successor 
of  Peter,  like  Peter  himself,  receives  his  sovereign  in- 
vestiture immediately  from  Jesus  Christ,  who  promised 
to  perpetuate  the  Petrine  office  despite  all  the  hostile 
powers  or  "gates  of  hell."  (Ibid.) 


144  Peter's  Name; 

Why  do  the  bishops  receive  jurisdiction  immediate- 
ly from  the  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ? 

Because  our  Lord  made  Peter  the  principle  and 
bond  of  Apostolic  unity,  and  therefore  ordained  that 
his  bishops  should  receive  jurisdiction  not  by  consecra- 
tion but  by  appointment — which  of  course  can  only 
come  from  a  superior,  and  consequently  from  the  Vicar 
of  Christ  on  earth. 

How  do  we  know  that  the  bishops  do  not  receive 
jurisdiction  by  means  of  consecration  or  ordination, 
together  with  the  fulness  of  the  sacrament  of  Order, 
but  by  appointment  from  the  Holy  See? 

From  the  words  and  actions  of  our  Lord :  for,  by  ap- 
pointment exclusively  did  he  confer  jurisdiction  on  the 
Apostles  both  before  and  after  their  ordination  and 
quite  independently  of  it — thereby  teaching  (a)  that 
jurisdiction  is  not  conferred  by  the  sacrament  of  Order 
but  by  appointment — and  (b)  that  it  may  be  conferred 
on  men  not  vested  with  the  clerical  dignity,  i.  e.  on  the 
laity — even  as  it  may  be  withheld  from  those  vested 
with  the  episcopal  character,  as  it  was  from  the  Apos- 
tles from  the  day  of  their  ordination  (Matt.  21.  26) 
to  the  eve  of  the  Ascension  (Matt.  28.  18) :  it  being 
thoroughly  distinct  and  separable  from  the  priestly 
power  of  Order. 


Comparative  powers  of  the  Pope  and  of  the  bishops 

(a)  As  regards  the  power  of  Order,  the  bishops 
are  the  equals  of  the  pope :  sacerdotally,  he  is  a  bishop 
and  so  are  they;  they,  as  well  as  he,  have  received  the 
plenitude  of  the  priesthood. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  145 

But  they  are  his  inferiors  and  his  subjects  in  the 
domain  of  jurisdiction  and  of  the  magisterial  power. 
One  man  on  earth  may,  but  intermittently  and  for 
a  few  minutes  only,  justly  exercise  authority  over  the 
Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ — namely,  the  pope's  confessor 
when  hearing  the  august  penitent's  confession. 

(b)  The    Holy    Father    receives    his    jurisdiction 
directly  from  Jesus  Christ  at  the  instant  he  accepts  the 
papal  office,  after  his  canonical  election. 

The  bishops  receive  their  jurisdiction  immediately 
from  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  the  visible  head  of  the 
Church. 

(c)  The  jurisdiction  of  the  Holy  Father  is  uni- 
versal and  Church-wide ;  the  jurisdiction  of  the  bishops 
is  local  and  restricted  to  their  diocese  or  to  the  sphere 
allotted  to  them  by  the  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ. 

(d)  The  jurisdiction  of  the  Holy  Father  is  sup- 
reme and  independent;  the  jurisdiction  of  the  bishops 
subordinate  and  dependent  on  the  authority  of  the  pope. 

(e)  The  pope  is  above  purely  human  laws,  civil 
and  ecclesiastical — above  the  whole  body  of  the  Church 
universal;  bishops  are  subject  to  the  Holy  Father  and 
to  all  the  laws  and  councils  of  the  Church.     In  their 
relations  with  the  sovereign  Pontiff,  they  belong  to  the 
Church  Governed,  not  to  the  Church  Governing. 

(f)  The  pope  alone  is  the  infallible  teacher  of  the 
Church  ex-cathedra,  i.  e.  from  the  magisterial  Chair 
of  Peter. 

Every  other  bishop  is  individually  fallible,  and  in 
his  relations  with  the  successor  of  Peter,  every  bishop 

PETER'S  NAME  10 


146  Peter's  Name; 

belongs   to  the   Church   Taught,   not  to  the   Church 
Teaching. 

The  whole  episcopal  body  acting  jointly  with  the 
visible  head  of  the  Church  partakes  of  the  infallibility 
of  the  Christ-appointed  head,  and  is  infallible  by  virtue 
of  Christ's  solemn  promise  to  Peter :  Luke  22.  32. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          147 
NOTE  XXII 


How  can  it  be  known  that  the  extraordinary  jurisdiction  and 

the  personal  infallibility  of  each  of  the  Apostles  do  not  endure 

in   their    successors? 

Answer: — From  the  testimony  of  Holy  Scripture 
and  the  irrefragable  witness  of  history. 

We  gather  from  Holy  Writ  that  Titus,  bishop  of 
Crete  (Tit.  i.  5)  and  Timothy,  bishop  of  Ephesus 
(Tim.  1.3),  and  the  other  bishops  appointed  by  the 
Apostles  (i  Pet.  5.  2;  Apoc.  2.  i,  8,  12,  18), — v.  g.  the 
bishops  of  Smyrna,  Pergamus,  Thyatira — possessed 
nothing  more  than  the  local  and  ordinary  jurisdiction 
enjoyed  by  bishops  nowadays  in  their  respective  dio- 
ceses. 

History  knows  of  no  bishops,  except  the  successors 
of  St.  Peter,  that  ever  claimed  universal  jurisdiction 
over  the  Church.  Not  even  Photius,  or  Cerularius,  or 
any  of  their  schismatic  successors,  ever  dared  to  claim 
authority  over  the  holy  Roman  Church.  Even  now, 
Eastern  schismatics  recognise  the  Pope  as  the  first 
Patriarch  of  the  Church. 

That  the  Apostles  themselves  did  not  regard  the 
bishops  consecrated  by  them  as  endowed,  individually, 
with  magisterial  infallibility,  seeing  evident  from  St. 
Paul's  address  to  the  Church  officials  whom  he  dis- 
tinctly calls  "bishops"  (Acts  20.28),  and  whom  he 
summoned  from  Ephesus  to  Miletus.  For,  he  predicts 
that  some  of  them  will  fall  into  schism  and  heresy. 


148  Peter's  Name; 

"Of  your  own  selves,"  says  he,  "shall  arise  men  speak- 
ing perverse  things  to  draw  away  disciples  after  them" 
(Acts  20.  30).  He  puts  the  bishop  of  Ephesus,  Tim- 
othy, on  his  guard  against  possible  errors  of  doctrine 
as  follows :  "Avoid  foolish  and  old  wives'  fables  .... 
till  I  come  attend  to  reading,  to  exhortation  and  to 
doctrine^i.  Tim.  4.  7,  13),— "Avoid  foolish  and  un- 
learned questions"  (2.  Tim.  2.  23). 

He  gives  the  same  warning  to  the  bishop  of  Crete, 
Titus,  to  whom  he  writes :  "In  all  things  show  thyself 
an  example  of  good  work,  in  doctrine,  in  integrity,  in 
gravity"  (Tit.  2.  7)— "Avoid  foolish  questions"  (Tit. 

3-  9). 

History  attests  that,  from  the  death  of  the  last  A- 
postle  to  this  2oth  century,  never  have  the  bishops  of 
the  Church  of  God  arrogated  to  themselves  the  special 
Apostolic  prerogative  of  individual  infallibility.  The 
only  infallible  personality  they  ever  recognised  is  that 
of  the  Christ-appointed  Confirmer  of  the  Faith  (Luke- 
22.32),  Peter  the  Rock,  ever  living  in  his  successors 
(Matt.  1 6.  18.,  etc.),  viz.,  the  bishop  of  Rome  (i  Pet. 
5.  13) — the  "Babylon"  from  which  Peter  dates  his 
first  Epistle.  "Babylon,  that  is  to  say,  heathen  perse- 
cuting Rome,  as  the  Sibylline  books  of  Jewish  origin 
had  long  ago  named  it',  observes  Dr.  Barry,  (Papal 
Monarchy,  p.  18). 

The  most  overwhelming  proof  that  the  individual 
infallibility  of  every  bishop  is  not  essential  to  the  pre- 
servation of  the  deposit  of  the  Faith,  is  the  fact  that 
the  Church  has  been  doing  without  such  a  supererog- 
atory gift  for  1900  years  without  deviating  by  one 
single  line  from  the  path  of  revealed  truth.  Therefore, 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          149 

the  experience  of  nineteen  centuries  proves  that  the 
three  divine  weapons  of  (a)  continuous  Tradition  and 
(b)  of  close  communion  with  the  infallible  Confirmer 
of  the  Faith  together  with  (c)  the  corporate  infall- 
ibility of  the  episcopate  under  its  visible  head — have 
abundantly  sufficed  to  keep  the  Church  from  error. 

Contrariwise,  the  extraordinary  privilege  of  invid- 
ual  infallibility  was  a  morally  imperative  necessity  as 
regards  the  twelve  very  first  introducers  of  Christian- 
ity to  the  world.  For,  had  the  very  first  seed  sown 
into  the  virgin  soil  of  the  Church  been  the  cockle  of 
false  doctrine,  error  would  have  claimed  the  right  of 
the  first  occupant,  and  the  resultant  evil  had  been  ir- 
remediable by  reason  of  the  boundless  faith  reposed  in 
the  Apostles.  No  subsequent  missionary  efforts  could 
have  repaired  the  harm  done.  Nay,  such  efforts  would 
have  been  repulsed  with  scorn  by  the  disciples  of  the 
Apostles,  who  would  have  plausibly  replied :  "We  would 
rather  believe  the  Apostles,  sent  directly  by  the  Saviour 
in  person,  than  strangers  and  innovators." 

Thus  it  would  have  come  to  pass  that,  the  vaster 
the  prestige  of  the  Apostles,  the  more  invincible  the 
tenacity  of  their  followers  to  cling  to  the  Apostolic 
errors  preached  to  them  from  the  very  start. 


150  Peter's  Name; 

NOTE  XXIII 


Comparative  Church-powers  of  Christ  and  of  Peter 

(First) — The  threefold  power  of  Christ  as  King, 
Prophet,  and  Priest,  belongs  to  Him  by  right  of  nature 
and  of  absolute  domain  over  all  creation;  whilst  it  be- 
longs to  Peter  by  grace  of  participation  only,  and 
through  the  infinite  mercy  of  the  Saviour. 

(Second) — The  universality  of  Christ's  threefold 
power  is  absolute  and  infinite;  whilst  the  universality, 
or  rather  the  plenitude,  of  Peter's  power  is  merely  re- 
lative, i.  e.  it  covers  the  entire  sphere  allotted  to  the 
whole  Church — but  that  sphere  itself  is  limited,  as  we 
shall  proceed  to  show. 

(1)  Christ's  Kingship  is  infinite.    Peter's  authority 
is  circumscribed  by  the  law  of  God  and  by  the  consti- 
tution of  the  Church  as  determined  by  her  Lord  and 
Master.    Consequently,  (a)  Peter,  or  the  Pope,  cannot 
change  the  form  of  Church  government — v.  g.  substi- 
tute autocracy  for  the  Divine  monarchy  established  by 
our  Lord;  (b)  he  cannot  alter  the  order  of  the  hier- 
archy— v.  g.  substitute  priests  or  laymen  for  bishops 
in  the  ordinary  and  permanent  administration  of  the 
Church;  (c)  he  cannot  create  a  new  Church;  (d)  he 
cannot  abrogate  the  existent  Church,  as  Christ  did  the 
Synagogue. 

(2)  Christ's  infallibility  as  Prophet  or  Teacher  is 
absolute  and  infinite,  not  limited  to  questidns  of  Faith 
and  morals ;  it  is  inseparable  from  his  Person  and  from 
his  every  act  and  utterance. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          151 

Peter's  infallibility  is  limited  to  the  public  exercise 
of  his  office  and  is  circumscribed  by  the  deposit  of  Re- 
velation, i.  e.  by  both  the  written  and  the  unwritten 
Word  of  God,  by  Holy  Writ  and  by  Divine  tradition. 

Consequently,  (a)  the  pope  cannot  reveal  new 
truths,  (b)  he  cannot  affix  a  new  meaning  to  the  Word 
of  God;  (c)  he  cannot  set  aside  the  New  Testament 
or  Divine  tradition,  or  replace  the  law  of  Christ  by  a 
new  law  of  his  own  device. 

Besides,  he  may  err  as  a  private  individual,  and  is 
infallible  only  as  a  public  person  teaching  officially  the 
whole  Church  in  matters  of  Faith  (Matt.  28.  19.  etc.), 
and  of  morals  (Matt.  16.  15  etc.)  i.  e.  as  to  what 
God  requires  us  to  believe  and  to  do  to  be  acceptable  to 
his  divine  Majesty. 

(3)  Christ's  power  as  the  High  Priest  of  the  Most 
High  is  causative  and  infinite. 

Peter's  sacerdotal  power  is  not  causative  but  in- 
strumental, and  is  circumscribed  by  the  seven  Sacra- 
ments, or  channels  of  grace,  instituted  by  our  Lord. 

Consequently,  (a)  Peter,  or  the  pope,  cannot  add 
to  the  number  of  the  sacraments;  (b)  he  cannot  sub- 
tract therefrom;  (c)  he  cannot  alter  their  form;  (d) 
he  cannot  change  the  matter  thereof;  (e)  he  cannot 
change  their  nature,  v.  g.  turn  the  sacraments  of  the 
living  into  sacraments  of  the  dead,  and  vice  versa; 
(f)  he  cannot  modify  their  character,  whether  delible 
or  indelible;  (g)  still  less  can  he  abolish  them,  or  any 
of  them,  altogether. 

But  Christ  could  at  will  effect  the  above  and  count- 
less other  additions,  subtractions,  or  changes — or  sup- 
press all  the  sacraments  without  exception,  by  enabling 


152  Peter's  Name; 

human  nature  to  do  away  with  its  inborn  need  of,  and 
craving  for,  a  sacramental  system. 

Falsely  therefore  is  the  Church  accused  of  putting 
Peter  above  our  Lord  Himself.  On  the  contrary,  she 
declares  Peter  infinitely  beneath  the  Master,  not  only 
as  priest  and  prophet  and  king,  but  particularly  as  the 
foundation  of  the  Church.  When  non-Catholics  charge 
the  Church  with  substituting  Peter  for  Christ  as  the 
Rock  whereon  she  is  built,  they  know  not  whereof 
they  speak  and  ignore  her  most  notorious  doctrine, 
which  the  sweet  genius  of  St.  Francis  de  Sales  sum- 
marises with  forceful  lucidity. 

We  transpose  and  arrange  the  various  paragraphs 
and  sentences  of  our  quotation  from  the  Saint,  so  as 
to  present  a  parallel  tableau  of  the  prerogatives  of 
Christ  and  Peter  -grwU  their  office  as  Foundation  of 
the  Church. 

First  difference :  our  Lord  is  Foundation  and  Foun- 
der; St.  Peter  is  foundation,  not  founder. 

Second  difference:  Christ  is  the  Foundation  with- 
out other  foundation ;  Peter  is  foundation,  but  founded 
on  another  Foundation,  which  is  our  blessed  Lord 
Himself. 

Third  difference:  Christ  is  the  Foundation  of  the 
Natural,  Mosaic,  and  Evangelic  Church;  Peter  is  the 
foundation  of  the  Evangelic  Church  alone. 

Fourth  difference:  Christ  is  Foundation  perpetual 
and  immortal;  Peter  is  foundation  subject  to  suc- 
cession. 

Fifth  difference:  Christ  is  Foundation  of  the  Mili- 
tant and  Triumphant  Church;  Peter  is  foundation  of 
the  Militant  not  of  the  Triumphant  Church. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          153 

Sixth  difference :  Christ  is  Foundation  by  His  own 
nature;  Peter  is  foundation  by  participation — minis- 
terial, not  absolute  foundation — in  short,  administrator, 
not  Lord. 

Seventh  difference :  Christ  is  the  Foundation  of  our 
faith,  hope  and  charity — and  of  the  efficacy  of  the 
sacraments.  Peter  is  in  no  way  the  foundation  of  our 
faith,  hope,  and  charity — nor  of  the  efficacy  of  the 
Sacraments.  (St.  Francis  de  Sales:  Cath.  Contro- 
versy, Eng.  tr.,  p.  246.) 


154  Peter's  Name; 


NOTE  XXIV 

The  alternative:    either  Peter  or  atheism 

The  ablest  thinkers  in  the  allied  camps  of  Ration- 
alism and  Protestantism  frankly  acknowledge  that 
whoever  can  delve  deep  down  to  the  very  bedrock  of 
the  Religious  question — must  face,  at  the  bottom  of 
it  all,  the  following  alternative :  either  there  is  no  Di- 
vine revelation,  or  the  Catholic  Church,  the  Church 
of  Peter,  is  in  possession  of  it. 

In  four  brief  words :   either  Peter  or  atheism. 

The  argument  is  without  a  flaw. 

They  say :  a  revelation  intrusted  to/depository  liable 
to  falsify  or  misapprehend,  or  mistranslate,  its  meaning 
— would  be  of  no  practical  use,  and  therefore  un- 
worthy the  infinite  wisdom  of  a  Divine  revelator. 

Consequently,  either  there  is  no  Revelation  at  all, 
or  it  has  been  intrusted  to  a  medium  of  infallible  reli- 
ability— i.  e.  to  an  infallible  interpreter. 

But  the  Catholic  Church  alone  claims  to  be  such 
an  infallible  interpreter  of  Revelation.  Therefore,  if 
the  Catholic  Church  is  false,  there  is  no  divine  Revela- 
tion; and  if  there  is  no  divine  Revelation  there  is  no 
Providence  caring  for  and  watching  over  the  welfare 
of  man;  and  if  there  is  no  Providence  there  is  no 
God. 

For,  if  the  unsilenceable  clamor  of  the  soul  for  a 
Divine  positive  reply  to  the  Whence  and  the  Whether 
and  the  Wherefore — must  remain  without  a  Divine 
positive  assurance,  which  assurance  alone  can  make 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          155 

life  worth  living — then  there  is  no  Providence;  and 
if  there  is  no  Providence  there  is  no  God,  i.  e.  no 
Supremely  Good  Being  overruling  the  destinies  of 
mankind.  So  that,  in  the  last  analysis,  as  acknowledged 
nowadays  by  thinking  Rationalists  and  Protestants,  if 
Catholicity  is  not  a  Divine  religion  or  revelation,  then 
there  is  no  Revelation  whatsoever.  If  there  is  no 
Revelation  there  is  no  Providence;  if  there  is  no 
Providence  there  is  no  God. 

We  recapitulate  the  substance  of  the  argument 
used  by  Protestant  and  rationalist  thinkers:  No  Cath- 
olicity, logically  means  no  Revelation.  No  Revelation, 
logically  means  no  Providence.  No  Providence,  logic- 
ally means  no  God. 

Therefore,  no  Catholicity,  logically  means  Atheism. 

Therefore,  human  reason,  in  its  ultimate  findings, 
is  confronted  with  this  alternative:  either  Catholicism 
or  atheism.  Either  Peter,  the  Rock — or  intellectual, 
moral  and  social  anarchy,  ending  in  Despair. 

The  subtlest  genius  England  ever  produced,  John 
Henry  Newman,  had  already,  even  before  joining  the 
Catholic  Church,  reached  this  inexorable  conclusion — 
which  is  gradually  burning  its  inexorable  logic  into  the 
acutest  minds  of  the  age,  and  is  visibly  beginning  to 
divide  the  civilized  world,  on  the  subject  of  Religion, 
into  two  distinct  camps,  and  two  only  viz.,  Catholics 
and  Atheists. 


The  famous  author  of  "Is  Life  Worth  Living," 
W.  H.  Mallock,  writes : 

"The  reality  of  supernatural  religion  being  granted, 
the  Roman  Church  alone  of  all  the  churches  gives  to 


156  Peter's  Name; 

such  a  Religion  a  logical  and  ^gmafl^coherent  form." 
(Mallock's  reply  to  Father  Fallon's  note  of  inquiry, 
dated  January  23,  1899.) 

Put  in  syllogistic  form,  Mr.  Mallock's  argument 
is  as  follows: 

If  there  exists  a  "supernatural  religion,"  it  must 
necessarily  be  embodied  in  a  rational  or  "logical  form" 
worthy  of  such  a  supernatural  boon;  but  its  only 
"logical  form"  is  "the  Roman  Church  alone  of  all  the 
churches" — therefore,  outside  "the  Roman  Church," 
there  is  no  supernatural  religion,  no  Divine  revelation. 

The  admission  of  a  very  influential  Protestant 
journal,  the  Christian  Register,  is  still  more  emphatic: 
It  begins  by  asking,  "Is  any  religion  given  by  divine 
revelation  and  supernatural  authority?  If  so,  which 
Religion  has  been  so  given,  what  are  its  credentials 
and  what  is  its  authority?" 

The  crucial  query  is  answered  in  the  following 
pithy  sentence:  "When  it  comes  to  the  final  test 
there  is  no  escape  from  the  most  extreme  position  of 
the  Catholic  Church  or  a  total  rejection  of  it." 

That  is  to  say :  either  there  is  no  revealed  Religion, 
or  that  Religion,  says  the  Register,  must  be  "the 
Catholic  Church" — since,  says  the  same  witness,  it 
must  be  both  infallible  and  sovereign,  and  the  Catholic 
Church  alone  of  all  the  churches  claims  to  be  in- 
fallible in  her  teaching  and  sovereign  in  her  authority. 

"Revealed  Religion,"  says  the  Register,  "is  infallible 
if  God  knows  the  truth  and  knows  how  to  tell 
it."  Therefore,  even  according  to  the  Register,  to 
deny  the  infallibility  of  revealed  Religion  is  to  blas- 
pheme against  the  Omniscience  and  Wisdom  of  God 
the  Revealer. 


or,  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name  157 

Of  the  sovereign  authority  inherent  in  such  a  Re- 
vealed Religion,  the  Register  writes:  "A  Religion 
given  by  supernatural  authority  is  not  to  be  neglected 
or  resisted.  It  has  the  right  to  command  the  al- 
ligiance  of  every  human  being.  Outside  of  this  Re- 
ligion there  is  no  truth  that  can  be  set  over  against 
it,  and  beyond  its  jurisdiction  no  human  being  has 
the  right  to  live,  or,  living,  to  choose  his  own  course 
of  action."  (Quoted  by  the  N.  Y.  Freeman's  Journal, 
March  29,  1902 — Italics  ours.) 

The  logical  conclusion  of  the  Protestant  organ  is 
that,  either  there  is  no  revealed  Religion  at  all,  or 
"there  is  no  escape  from  the  most  extreme  position 
of  the  Catholic  Church." 

Now,  what  Protestants  and  all  non-Catholics  regard 
as  "the  most  extreme  position  of  the  Catholic  Church" 
is  her  magisterial  infallibility  and  her  sovereign  auth- 
ority— both  summed  up  in  Peter. 

Therefore,  according  to  non-Catholic  thinkers, 
"there  is  no  escape"  from  Papal  infallibility  and  sove- 
eignty :  either  Peter  or  atheism. 


The  indefectibility  of  the  Rock  is  the  crowing 
glory  of  its  Creator,  Jesus  the  Christ. 

But  does  not  papal  infallibility,  as  well  as  papal 
sovereignity,  detract  -from  the  honor  due  to  God? 

Not  a  tittle  more  than  the  divine  foresight  of  the 
Prophets  or  the  inspiration  of  the  sacred  writers  of 
the  Word  of  God. 

The  reverse  is  the  truth. 

All  those  miraculous  gifts — prophecy,  inspiration, 
infallibility  etc. — add  immeasurably  to  the  external 


158  Peter's  Name; 

glory  of  God.  For,  the  more  intensively  and  extensively 
does  the  Creator  reflect  His  attributes  in  His  creature, 
the  more  beautifully  is  He  Himself  honored,  exalted, 
and  glorified  in  His  own  works. 

They  do  not  understand  the  a,  b,  c  of  the  redemp- 
tive Plan  of  God  who  have  yet  to  learn  that  the  Re- 
deemer's aim  is  to  restore  and  honor  the  erstwhile 
degraded  prey  of  Satan  and  his  hosts,  viz.,  poor  fallen 
man  and  the  entire  lower  creation,  affected  by  the 
original  fall.  Hence  God's  particular  delight  in  loading 
man  with  honors  divine,  and  in  partly  raising  His 
lower  creation  itself  to  the  supernatural  order  by 
using  it  in  the  sacraments  and  in  the  sacramentals 
of  His  Church — v.  g.  water,  wine,  olive  oil,  balsam, 
incense,  wheaten  bread,  salt,  beeswax,  the  snow-white 
fleece  of  spotless  lambs,  altar-stones,  cedar  or  other 
wood  used  in  the  construction  of  her  tabernacles  and 
of  her  temples,  etc.  etc. 

This  is  but  an  earnest  of  the  full  and  glorious 
restoration  that  awaits  man  and  all  the  lower  kingdoms 
of  nature  at  the  expiration  of  the  Christian  Cycle  of 
Time — a  restoration  for  which  St.  Paul  assures  us 
"the  whole  creation  groaneth" :  Ro.  8.  22. 

Nor  must  it  be  forgotten  that  all  those  divine  gifts, 
offices,  prerogatives — prophecy,  inspiration,  infallibility, 
divine  authority,  etc.  are  not  vouchsafed  for  the  mere 
glorification  of  their  recipients  but  for  the  benefit  of 
all  mankind.  They  are  the  means  to  an  end.  Now, 
the  end  is  greater  than  the  means  and  is  within  the 
reach  of  all  men,  to  wit:  that  they  become,  here  be- 
low, really  "partakers  of  the  Divine  nature"  (2  Pet. 
1.4) — men-gods  as  Christ  is  God-man — that  they  be 
raised  to  a  higher  order  of  creatures,  a  strictly  divine 


or^  a  Divine  Credential  in  a  Name          159 

order  of  being  as  far  above  human  nature  as  the 
human  is  above  the  brute  creation. 

Such  a  deified  state,  open  as  it  is  to  all  "men  of 
good  will"  (Luke  2.  14),  is  intrinsically  above 
all  the  offices  and  the  sacraments  used  as  means 
thereunto — not  excepting  the  sacramental  power  of 
consecration;  for  this  may  be  exercised  by  one  in  a 
state  of  sin,  whilst,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Godhead  so 
dwells  in  man  deified  by  sanctifying  grace  that  God 
and  the  human  soul  really  draw  the  same  Breath  of 
Divine  life — breathing  simultaneously  out  of  the  same 
Breath — namely,  the  Adorable  Breath  of  God  known 
and  adored  as  the  thrice  Holy  Spirit. 

It  is,  then,  in  perfect  keeping  with  the  Divine 
Plan  that  the  selfsame  God  who  willed  that  we  all, 
without  exception,  "should  be  called  and  should  be 
verily  the  sons  of  God"  (i  John  3.  i)  for  the  greater 
glory  of  God  and  of  man — it  is,  we  repeat,  in  perfect- 
keeping  with  the  Plan  of  God  Incarnate  that  He  should 
also  will  to  exercise  His  own  Priesthood  through  the 
ministry  of  man,  and  should  likewise  will  to  exercise 
His  Headship  over  His  Body  through  the  same  human 
agency. 

Thus  God  Incarnate  who,  for  our  sake,  delegated 
to  His.  Apostles  His  own  power  to  forgive  sin  (John 
20.  23),  has  likewise,  out  of  love  for  us  all,  delegated 
to  Peter — in  so  far  as  He  made  him  the  Rock  by 
grace  and  participation — His  own  indefectibility  as  the 
eternal  and  divine  Rock  by  nature. 

Thus  it  is  that  papal  infallibility,  as  well  as  papal 
sovereignty,  redounds  to  the  eternal  glory  of  God  and 
to  the  greatest  honor  and  welfare  of  mankind. 


i6o 


Conclusion 


In  this  and  in  a  previous  work,  we  have  seen  that 
Peter's  divine  name  is  his  Divine  credential,  by  reason 
of  its  divine  bestowal,  import,  and  treatment  in  Holy 
Writ. 

Now,  this  Divine  credential  and  title  of  office  oc- 
curs one  hundred  and  sixty  six  times  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. And  oh  how  eloquently  do  these  166  iterations 
of  the  Petrine  name  speak  to  the  eye  and  to  the  ear ! 

To  the  eye  of  the  faithful  reader,  they  show  forth 
one  hundred  and  sixty-six  Christ-signed  proclamations 
of  the  Petrine  office — signed  and  written  by  the  hand 
of  God  on  as  many  plates  of  gold,  and  adorning 
the  length  and  height  and  breadth  of  the  inner  and 
outer  walls  of  the  scriptural  Temple. 

To  the  ear  of  the  faithful  hearer,  these  166  itera- 
tions of  the  Petrine  name  sound  like  one  hundred 
and  sixty-six  silver  trumpets  encircling  the  dome  of 
the  grand  Temple,  and  blown  by  the  mouth  of  the 
Angel  of  the  Covenant,  and  thrilling  all  the  stones  of 
the  Temple,  with  the  "Tu  es  Petrus"  intoned  by  the 
Saviour,  nineteen  centuries  ago. 


J  H  V   H 


Impri-m  i   po  test : 
A.  Heuchemer,  V.  G. 

January  18  A.  D.  1909 

San  Antonio,  Texas 


00164 


